Slashdot Mirror
iPhone Faces Uncertain Market
48 hours have passed since Steve Jobs's MacWorld keynote and the reality distortion field is beginning to wear off. Lists of the drawbacks of the announced iPhone are sprouting all over the Net (and there is the occasional defense by true believers). Now narramissic writes, "The iPhone may be poised to take over the high-end cell phone market, but is it a market worth taking? Not if an InStat survey from July is any indication: Of 1,800 consumers surveyed, just 21 had spent more than $400 for a cell phone. Prices for the iPhone, admittedly more of a handheld computer than a cell phone, start at $499 for the 4G-byte version with a required two-year contract with Cingular. So, is Apple pricing it right? Analysts quoted in this article seem to think Apple's going to have a hard time getting the 1% of market share that Jobs called for."
That most people won't spend over $400 on a phone because there aren't any phones worth spending that much on? The high end market may be small... but there's no reasoning given for not spending so much... maybe it's just because nothing (until now, IMO) has been worth the extra $$?
A phone that makes AM quality calls, at cheap rates. MAYBE with texting capabilties. I might buy that.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
If you are looking for an iPod and a phone, or if the phone is a bonus, the price may be worth it to you.
I'm not familiar with the specs of the iPhone, but it isn't as simple as "this is a really expensive phone."
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
Or is Daniel Eran's article the best-written?
Just remember what everybody was saying about the iPod when it first came out. You may not like them, but I'd say Apple has been pretty on the mark over the last 5 years or so...
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
This report fails to take into account the added capabilities of this phone. People will be much more willing to spend 300+ dollars on a phone from a company that has a impressive history in the mp3 player department. This is not just a phone. Remember that. Prof
If you look at Cingular's current plans for blackberrys, their voice and data packages start at about $80 per month. You can bet they will charge at least that for the iPhone service, if not more. even if it is just $80 a month, you are going to wind up paying $2520 over two years (including $600 for the phone), and that's before fees and taxes.
So that $600 price tag is really closer to $3000.
If Apple is really smart, they've already locked Cingular to a reasonable cell plan. They might be able to capture the high-end market with the iPhone, but without cheaper plans, they will never get the majority of people.
I'm having deja vu reading this article and comparing it to very similar articles on Slashdot (for iPod) few years back.
...and the iPhone is exactly what I want. But I'm not buying it. It's cool, but it's not $500 cool.
I'll probably buy a cheap-o model and wait. Someone let me know when there's an unlocked model for $250.
What if I do the same thing, and I do get different results?
Everybody always claimed the iPod was way too expensive, yet it kept selling even in the presence of other lower-priced competitors. With this thing, you get a full iPod and more, so the price isn't THAT unreasonable. ($100 difference between 4 and 8 GB is a bit much tho... the Nano's difference is only $50)
Personally, I think the iPhone sounds cool but I will never buy one (or at least in the near future) ... There are two reasons why I dislike "do everything" or "convergence" hardware, usually the hardware is average or bad at every task and very expensive, forgetting (or losing) a phone/MP3 Player/PDA is bad but forgetting (or losing) your phone and MP3 Player and PDA is awful.
Something as small as having a touch screen to dial your phone, and display everything, means that you're either going to have to carry around a stylus (which you will probably lose) which will scratch your screen, or your screen will have fingerprints; either way it means images/videos/text will be hard to read.
Quite honestly, we don't know enough about the device yet to make any informed commentary. We're going to have to deal with six months of analysts talking out of their ass about it, and Apple fanboys/haters blathering on about how wonderful/awful it is without more than a basic overview of its functionality and no hands on UI experience. The 'specs' from Apple are a joke, and don't reveal the most basic of needed information. The details of the restrictions that will be placed on the device by Cingular are completely unknown. Until those things are known, it could go in any direction.
Anybody who talks about what is going to happen with the iPhone in certain terms at this point is an idiot.
> Of 1,800 consumers surveyed, just 21 had spent more than $400 for a cell phone.
This could simply mean that there were no phones good enough to justify the higher price tag. I mean, is there a phone with a few GB of memory, big touch screen and really good software? What kind of phone can you buy for $500 right now?
Not that one success guarantees many, but how large was the high-end mp3 player market when the $400 iPod was released? If they had made a business decision based on current market share, they never would have created the iPod at all. Clearly they think that a market can be created.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
People know about the iPhone now, and that it will be a widescreen ipod + phone and widgets and all, but they're disappointed about the 4GB or 8GB limited capacity.
A couple months from now, Apple will release a new video iPod with widescreen and touchscreen and no phone or widgets, with 60GB - 120GB capacities, and people will eat it up like candy.
I would.
Apple tend to launch a product and then fork it into a product family that covers a nice price range. This format could expand to include a hard drive and become a real portable hand-held, the new Newton. It could also shrink to become a simpler phone. Expect the actual release model in June to have much more memory, and better battery life.
The biggest problem with all smartphones today is that UI design is generally terrible. If Apple can get this right, and make a family of phones that react quickly and are fun to use, they will sell a lot of them.
Further, it seems to me, phone or not, that this is what the iPod will look like in 2 years time. The wheel is no longer needed, and this format makes video a pleasant reality.
So it's quite possible that the "phone" part of this product is less significant than the large-screen, no-button, Apple-inside format.
My blog
No 3G. It has WiFi, and open WiFi networks are ubiquitous in most major (and less major) cities. For other places, it still has EDGE/GPRS.
-b.
I seem to recall comments that the iPod was overpriced and that Apple would never capture the market with it when there were other options with lower price tags. Hmmm. Sounds familiar, no?
However, I have no plans to buy one. I do want an iPod that's just like the iPhone, though... minus the "Phone" part.
#DeleteChrome
Phone with music with browsing features is nothing new.
It might have cuter iterface but all of the features are already available for a much lower price.
For me this Phone doesn't have any new must have features.
I usally just remote desktop to my home computer from my phone and access my personal email, schedule tv recordings etc.
Apple doesn't chase existing markets, it creates new ones:
"Apple was more interested in defining markets than trying to catch other companies that were busy trying to create a market for questionable products." - Steve Jobs
Also, Apple doesn't do market research (they believe - perhaps justifiably - that they can dictate to the consumer what the consumer really needs):
"I can't think of a comparable company that does no--zero--market research with its customers before releasing a product." - Lev Grossman
Think about it. Most people who buy phones just want a phone that works. That's not the market Apple's going for. They're going for the guys that keep upgrading their expensive iPods with more expensive and newer iPods. Now, they'll get the latest "iPod" but it'll have a phone built-in too. If you look at the sales of the most expensive iPods, you'll see that there's more than enough people there to get Jobs' 1% market share that he wants out of the gates. Don't underestimate the loyalty that the Apple brand garners. It's much like Nintendo's. They'll buy whatever is the latest and greatest.
AirSpeak - http://itunes.com/apps/AirSpeak
And how much was the ipod when it first came out? Wasn't it viewed as a "high end" MP3 player compared to players like Rio etc.? How about the historical price progression of flat panel TV's?
Cutting edge products like this always start out on the low end of the demand curve at high price points. Over time, prices come down and demand picks up.
The key right now is not how many can Apple sell, but can it win the competitive battle in the Swiss-phone market so that when the time comes where price and demand are more properly aligned, it has the mindshare of the market as being the product in the market to buy.
It's just like the progression with the ipod really.
I think the parent was being funny, paraphrasing comments that were made about the original iPod.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Just like how the iPod was initially only for the high end market, right? When Apple released the ipod, it created new demand that didn't exist before and didn't show up in the data. People didn't want "expensive," high end music players simply because they were hard to use an inaccessible. Apple fixed that and created new customers many times over.
No amount of two-bit analysis predicted that expensive HD-based players would blow up as they did. Apple showed these "analysts" that they were morons.
The iPhone will do the same.
-b.
Up front, I admit that I despise Apple as a company. I hate their lying, I hate their arrogance, and I hate how they abuse their customers.
However -- when I saw the iPhone, I was really tempted. Finally Apple may have a made a product that appeals to me, and doesn't have the stink of arrogance around it (e.g., Steve doesn't like radio, therefore, no one else will get radio on the iPod).
Until the details started leaking. No replaceable battery??? WTF??? I'm supposed to throw it away after a year when the battery dies?
No third party development tools??
Lock-in to only one cellular provider? Not surprising from the company that locks you into their hardware, but... what the hell?
-sigh- Same old Apple. Same old arrogant stupidity. Same old nuggests of good ideas packaged in a screw-the-consumer package.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
The survey is not really asking the right question. People generally don't spend 500 bucks on a phone because there are no phones out there with 8GB of flash memory and an iTunes client as standard. People in the UK are fairly happy to drop 100/200 quid (3-400 bucks) on an HTC Tytn variant...How much did a top end Palm used to cost before it had an aerial?
Invoicing, Time Tracking, Reporting
They may have an even harder time with Cisco owning the iPhone trademark:
c os_iphone_tradem.html
http://blogs.cisco.com/news/2007/01/update_on_cis
Apple will not be able to manufacture enough of the iPhone to meet demand, probably for a pretty long time. Mark my words, Google.
The eunuchs -- I mean critics -- can employ all the reasoning they like. If they were so damn smart the iPod would have been discontinued years ago.
--Richard
well, of the 4 people I know personally who are aware of this thing, all 4 want it NOW.
people are infatuated with their devices, once this hits, it's gonna be a hit.
it's gonna have 1% of the market quicker than apple would be willing to predict
I heard itunes sales were "down", did the iPhone downer info come from the same spin machine?
Cisco is gonna love their cut, expect it to be bundled with routers
it's not even 3G let alone high end.
In the UK it's not uncommon for phones to cost over £550/$1000 (cell companies usually spread this out by giving you a 'free' phone so long as you stay in a £40/$80 a month contact for 18 months cosign a total of £720/$1400)
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
I'd like to see apple come out with a simple phone: huge battery, huge antennae, a quality speaker/mic, and one of their great interfaces. Then I'd buy it. I give them credit for coming up with a nice all-in-one... but I have no need for it.
1. Apple releases iPhone 1.0 (ApplePhone after Cisco gets through with them?) in 4GB and 8GB sizes
2. Apple Fanboys will buy this version because "17 50 7074||y ru|35 4nd w1|| pwn 7h3 m4rk37 dud3!"
3. Apple will release version 2.0 with way more storage (1.8" hard disk or SSD) for half the price. This will happen in about 18 months, But not actually ship for another 4 - 6 months after it is announced. (so as not to piss off Cingular)
4. Joe Sixpack will buy that version in droves. Fanboys who have version 1.0 rush to upgrade because "17 50 7074||y ru|35 4nd w1|| pwn 7h3 m4rk37 dud3!"
5. Profit!
This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
Businesses do.
Except for gadget geeks, probably 80% of the Blackberrys, Treos, etc are purchased by companies for employees or by business owners.
Apple is hoping to extend that market by taking a typical consumer/parent who is about to buy a $300 iPod anyway and convincing them spend another $200 for a phone that has unique internet capability. The reasoning behind this is that a person who is ready to by a $300 device is far more likely to spring for a $500 device.
The typical phone buyer considers the phone to be almost disposable. If you come into a store to buy a $50 RAZR after rebate, you're not going to get them to spring for $499. So Apple is taking advantage of the iPod buzz to upsell iPod consumers (the average iPod buyer has already owned 3) into iPhones.
This is sales 101. That's why half the people who show up to buy a Toyota Corolla drive away with a Prius. ("Hmm... $5000 more and I have a hybrid AND get bluetooth and that neato screen")
On the flip side, they'll get businesses to buy some too. Enterprises will stick with Blackberries because they use Exchange and like the security aspects of the device, but there are plenty of mid-level managers with purchase authority to spend $500-600.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
Honestly, I really hope that Apple released the device without a ship date to pay attention to additional requests. No Camera flash/zoom? Maybe they'll go back and add it. No GPS? Maybe they'll release an option for GPS. Who knows, but I hope they're paying attention.
[%] Cingular Ringtones
If anyone knows how to achieve a 1% market share, it's Apple.
Brand? Who outside of people who are IT professionals even know what Cisco actually makes? Brand?
My parents only know about Cisco because they got burned by their stock plummet in the late 90's. They have no idea what they do except that its some kind of "buy the infrastructure" stock play. And doesn't the iPhone name gets at least "a little" of its positive connotation because of iPod and iMac? So whose brand is it anyway?
As for selling enough, its an iPod, a phone, and an internet communicator. An iPod, a phone, and an internet communicator. An iPod, a phone, and an internet communicator. Are you getting it?
(reactivate reality distortion)
I'd rather buy a PS3 than an iPhone with that money.
I've never had a blackberry, but how does it stack up against a blackberry? A high end blackberry can cost 700 USD (based on a quick web search) so if this is thier target market then it may be viable.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
Apple has always cost more because they take the risk of using modern technology and open a new market. Most critics said the iPod would never sell because it was too pricey but there was a need for the product. Now with digital media players costing $200 to $300 dollars, iPod and other audio devices another $200 to $300 and smart phones again are in the $200 to $300 market it makes sense that a product that combines the three will be priced at $600. But this doesn't mean anything. How many people bought the first iPods? The iPod took off on the third Generation three years after the iPod was introduced. The phone changes the technology and will start us on a new course. The question isn't if you will or can afford the product now? It is more of a question will this product change the way we communicate? And only the fools will by the first generation especially when Flash based memory is increasing in size and the costs and functions of these devices will only increase with time.
Well, that's more than 1%...
I am now using the second generation of what is a much superior device: the HP Ipaq HW6945.
It is also available for $500 with a contract from Cingular. You will probably also want to ditch the GPS software it comes with in favor of TomTom 6.
It's camera isn't as good (though it does have a LED Flash) and it's screen isn't as large, but the screen is still fairly large. With miniSD cards you can have a LOT of space and swap the cards easily between your reader to get video over to it. You can also stream audio (and presumably video) over either wireless or EDGE.
Love or hate WM5, there are many, many 3rd party apps for it. And it has a keyboard which I am grateful to have in exchange for the somewhat smaller screen.
Granted, the processor is a little wheezy, and hopefully the third generation of this device will be even better. The GPS is awesome as it seems to get signal even when I am in my office with the blides closed. And since I am almost always in the car when I have the GPS the battery drain isn't an issue.
I love how all this "FUD" tells how bad the product is or what's wrong with the device before any of it has hit the market.
This can ONLY help Apple to fix things before they sell it. Apple has about 5 months to smooth it out, you know.
And I think the price is just fine for what it offers.
People have no problems spending money on a P3 now, this wont be any different.
It's left blank because I have nothing to say to you punks!
It seems to me Apple are trying to create an elite product people will aspire to own, and plans to capitalize on that position when they introduce cheaper versions with more limited features, kind of like ipod minis and shuffles really hitch a ride on the demand for "full blown" ipods.
Slashdot: news from nerds.
The iPod line needed a reboot, and the iPhone was splashiest way to do it. In fact, this device is the logical evolution of the Newton MessagePad. Think about it. Apple realized that boring contact lists, calendars and handwriting recognition won't encourage the Unwashed Masses to adopt portable computers. People are far more media-centric than that.
The rejuvenated iPod lineup will tempt you with music, movies and games, while offering an addictive combination of go-anywhere Wi-Fi browsing and email. And you can bet that Apple is planning to open up third-party development as quickly as possible.
As for the iPhone device, the bleak reality is that it is slightly larger than a 5G iPod. Too big to slip into the pocket of my jeans, which means it's too large to use as my everyday phone. My hard drive-equipped iPod usually lives in a messenger bag on my shoulder or in a jacket pocket, simply because it's too bulky to function as an "everywhere" communications accessory. I wouldn't be willing to carry something as large or expensive as the iPhone with me everywhere I go. I'd look like a dork with my calculator on a belt clip. Besides, mobile phones are expensive enough to begin with and many people (especially students) will balk at the idea of committing to a 2 year $1000+ mobile voice/data/voicemail contract after shelling out $599 for the iPhone itself.
No, the real magic will happen when Apple releases a $299 version of this device - the next generation iPod - that retains everything but the GSM + EDGE phone technology. At that point, the iPod will be perfectly positioned to become everyone's favorite teeny-tiny ultraportable computer.
Why Apple didn't released a version without the phone?
I mean, maybe there's a bigger market for cellphones than for handhelds... but I still feel that Apple could released it as the high end version of iPod Video, and included a hard drive.
IMHO there's a good chance that this will happen eventually. I just don't understand why they went for the Phone first...
Also, I'm wondering what will become of Palm... up until now it have faced competition from PocketPC devices only, and while Windows Mobile has it's merits Palm had some advantage due it's simple interface. But now that Apple entered on the handheld marked again it will be much more difficult to keep their market share.
What do you think?
---- You know how some doctors have the Messiah complex - they need to save the world? You've got the "Rubik's" complex
So 1% of people surveyed essentially said they'd buy an expensive phone.... Apple is targeting 1% of the market..... DOOMED
The problem is that the article is talking about prices for merely cell phones and not smartphones. Most people who want just a phone don't want to spend the extra cash on features they don't need. I'd like to know how many people spend more than $400 on a smartphone specifically, not just on phones in general. $500 is not an abnormally high price for a smartphone.
Between that and not having to shell out for desk phones or wiring the building for them (for new installations) they'd more than pay for themselves.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
According to Gizmodo and Apple VP's:
...)
The OS isn't going to be "OS X for real." It's more like a pseudo-OS X and, like the iPod, it will not have a public API and open development.
Unlike the Pocket PC which has open API's for development by third party people (like you and me
Seriously, go check this out. They're going to print money with this thing.
Ever since the leaked rumors about a widescreen, touchscreen Video iPod, I've been drooling over the possibilities. But that was when it was assumed to be a high-capacity Video iPod, totally separate from the also-rumored iPhone device. Now it looks like the only way to get that snazzy new screen is with a low-capacity hybrid phone, with an expensive exclusive service contract to boot?!
IMHO that new screen is being wasted, since you'll never be able to fit any kind of video library on it. I would much rather have seen the Touchscreen and the iPhone as two separate products; or at the very least, give us a non-Cingular-enslaved Touchscreen option at the same time...
Apple could be trying to market the ZunePhone.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
IMO The iphone is not likely to be a volume device like the $199 ipod that is their best seller or like a $49 after-signing-your-life-away RAZR. Take away the subsidy and you're talking about a $799 device. It is too specialized (phone + GSM contract from a US carrier + widescreen ipod = reduced number of customers) and expensive to meet the needs of everyone who otherwise wants to buy new apple stuff for themselves.
I think what Apple has basically done is throw down the gauntlet to say, "see what we can do? No one else is even close." It's like the Intel switch - totally amazing from a tech point of view and creates stakeholder buzz and props the shareprice and leaves the impression that apple can do anything they want to do at any time.
I'm blown away and I have zero plans to buy one.
Are these guys nuts? Remember the Treo 600? Everyone griped about the lack of a replaceable battery. Lithium ion batteries need to be replaced periodically. The batteries in the iPhone will definitely need some sort of service within the 24 month contract that Cingular will require with the iPhone.
My last PDAs (Treo 650, Treo 700, and current Motorola Q) all have replaceable batteries, and they get used quite often. It's nice to be able to switch out a battery when you need it.
I guess the non-replaceable battery design drives iPod replacement sales, but that design feature will hinder the useful operation of the iPhone.
Wait for rev 2 or rev 3. This one is going to be painful.
-ted
> Businesses do.
Well, about businesses, as David Pogue pointed out, typing on this thing is hard. It seems it's going to be hard to touch type on this, and if you've sat through 3 hour meetings, you'll know that under-the-table typing is _the_ killer app for Blackberries.
And let's not even get started about IT grumbling about getting music-and-video devices for employees...
Go somewhere random
Read the summary of this article posted by Cmdr Taco concerning the announcement of the iPod. Pay particular attention to the last line.
/ 1816257
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23
Consider: you phone has changed twice in five years, and was carrier-subsidized. You paid for it one way or the other (except, perhaps, in California). So now, you get more goodies and that famous Apple "it just works" instead of some odd version of Symbian or heaven-help-us Windows Mobile.
I'm not defending the phone. I'd like to NOT change one every 2.5 years, and have some entertainment value for those long, overbooked flight pauses I get. I have too many cables, too many data sources, have used too many carriers (they all uniformly suck), and have to spend at least a few days getting used to whatever bizarre software they put on the phones I've had from Nokia, SE, Moto, etc. Gimme something usable. I hope iPhone is it. Otherwise, Apple can go pound sand.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
The BB is the closest thing to this in functionality (and it even misses out on a bunch), and it's upwards of $400 (IIRC). I think that people are looking in the wrong market.
This isn't just another RAZR -- it's an Apple-branded iPod, cellular phone, and PDA, running OSX. While I won't be buying one (just because I don't think it's overpriced doesn't mean I can afford it), I'd seriously consider it if I had $500 to drop, and didn't mind switching to Cingular.
The only interesting concerns I've seen are about the fragility of an "all-screen" device and the copyright issues of the name, neither of which will matter much in a couple years (make it stronger, change the name).
I [may] disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
My wife bought me a Palm LifeDrive for our tenth wedding av, and it is *very* close to a perfect handheld device.
There are a few quirks (what device doesn't have those?) but it is most of the way down the road.
The screen size and general form factor is about perfect; any bigger and it'd be too clunky, any smaller and it'd be too small to read - this is my biggest complaint with smartphones like the Treo family.
I've mated it to a Garmin GPS 10 BlueTooth GPS Reciever, and it makes a great driving GPS.
Here's what I think makes for a killer handheld device:
1) Same form factor as the LifeDrive; the LD screen is awesome.
2) Lots of storage, like ~80Gb, plus the SD slot;
3) BlueTooth connectivity, especially for headsets/headphones, but the device should act as a BlueTooth hub and be able to talk to anything;
4) Wireless G;
5) A multi-band GSM phone;
6) GPS;
7) A good MP3/Media player (should be able to play all reasonable media formats)
8) Enough processor power so it can play movies without skipping, redraw GPS maps seamlessly, and remain responsive to use input at all time.
The LifeDrive is ever so close, lacking primarily the phone, the storage space, and the processor power. The iPhone *almost* gets it right too.
Eventually, somebody will build one of these, and convergence will be complete.
DG
Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
If it ran Linux, then ...
nevermind, The OpenMoku, runs Linux, has a touch screen no button design, and they seem to have an open source commitment.
If you've been considering upgrading to the new Treo 750, you're going to spend $500 with a two year contract. And it only comes with 64 MB of ram and a best case expansion of 2 gig which puts the price at $550 and is obviously inferior on paper.
I'm just saying Apple isn't breaking ground on cell phone price points in this category.
Platform advocacy is like choosing a favorite severely developmentally disabled child.
Now down to the nitty gritty.. this device is amazing, it may be a rehash of whats out there.. but it is done better.. more fluid.. intuitive.. its great because it is an all in one!! but thats its weakness too..
My only problem is it if this one device breaks/stolen/damaged.. you are screwed not once, but 3 times!! no phone, no ipod, no internet communicator!!
I though both my Treos and currently my Pearl is great (oh btw a blacm nano 2G and Pearl looks great side by side).. but I am not sticking a ££$$££ phone in my pocket when I am running etc.. it is going to get so icky!!
The parent was quoting the Slashdot story on the original iPod:
/ 1816257&tid=107
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23
I think Apple isn't all that interested in 'taking over' the high-end cellphone market as much as they're interested in defining a new category of communications device that's not thought of as a cellphone.
This thing is just a first stab, and it's being aimed at the high-end cellphone market, if only because that's a market that exists, and to communicate, you've got to have people to communicate with. But perhaps Apple's betting that, though it may make phone calls, the gadget of the future won't be though of as a phone.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
Apple has long been the Mercedes Benz/BMW of computers, mp3 players, and now they are going to be the same to cell phones. I don't hear apple, mercedes benz, bmw, or their customers complaining. There is also another problem with phones that cost more then $400. They run Palm and Pocket PC. Of course nobody is really interested. OS X on a phone is something else.
You mean the FUD campaign initiated by frightened competitors is flaring up. This story makes it seem like everyone is suddenly deciding not to buy the iPhone after "coming to their senses." Hardly the case. This thing will sell like crazy, and the fact Slashdot is posting a story saying it won't just means it will. Remember the iPod? The iPod mini? Slashdot said they'd fail.
"Sufferin' succotash."
It's going to take a LONG time for the iPhone to ever gain any traction. Sure, iPods sell in the tens of millions every quarter, but that's only because the most popular models are the cheapest ones, namely the iPod Shuffle and lower end iPod Nanos. Also notice that Apple didn't get an insane amount of sales UNTIL those cheaper models hit the market. And still today, you can see people will envy cool looking gadgets but will never buy them until they reach a mass-market price (which is pretty much $200 and below). Of course, no one really expects the iPhone to be the end-all to the high-end cell phone market right away. I'd say give it 2 years or so before we start seeing a major popularity craze. Oh, and Apple needs to sign up other phone companies as well, otherwise it's just going to be a novelty like the PS3.
I'd never spend more than $400 for a phone. Thankfully, the iPhone is a heck of a lot more than just a phone.
I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
Why?
mp3 player - iPod - worth $250
Cell Phone with push email - worth $250
User Interface - priceless
The iPhone is technology, it's price will drop just like all other phones and computers. Frankly, if it had a hard drive, I'd buy one.
No, I will not work for your startup
In order to meet their 1% goal they need to sell 10M phones in 2008 (the first full year they are available). That is directly paraphrased from Steve Jobs during the keynote. It may be hard to sell a $500 to $600 phone in those quantities. But Steve Jobs himself said they are going to continue developing iPhones (3G...). Does anyone really think that this is the only phone Apple will be selling for all of 2008?
I think Apple will sell a lot more than 10 million iPhones in 2008 when they add the iPhone nano to their lineup a year from now. I predict the iPhone nano will be physically smalelr and drop some of the pricey "smart phone" features of it's big brother. But it will still have the great interface and importantly, style, of it's big brother. Probably will come in colors too. $200-$300. That will fly off the shelves.
You heard it here first.
Spyky
Well, I fall in that camp. I have never spent $400 on a cell phone because the ones available are crap and I hate even spending $50 on them. But I will gladly hand over $500 as soon as I can get my hands on an iPhone
These people don't realize it's not just a phone. Everyone who has an iPod and a crappy mobile phone would love to have just one device.
The price means nothing. Just look at all the young people around who don't have $10 to go to the movies with their friends, but they sure have an iPod. When kids wants something, they will get the money. If they must have it, they will.
When are they going to come out with the iWoman. There really aren't too many models out there with a usable interface, awesome features, sleek design, and low cost. And there's a HUGE market demand that I would say is VERY predictable.
Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling a pig in mud. Soon, you realize the pig is dirty, and he likes it.
I don't really see the big deal. As far as I can tell my current phone does just about all the same stuff and I didn't spend a penny for it with the Verizon new phone every two years program.
The only thing that sounds mildly interesting is the voice mail features allowing you to view and select your messages, and that's certainly no deal breaker.
Has the consumer market ever bought into > $400 phones? I was under the impression that most of the high-end smart phones are being bought by companies and issued to employees. At least, that's the been the case for all of my phones this past decade.
I think Apple is going to have a hard time selling the iPhone as a serious business mobile, much like Mac OS X to this day has a hard time in corporate America, it's just too flashy and on the expensive side. Sure the iPhone is cool, and I'd be lying if I said I didn't want one, but much like I (briefly) wanted a PS3 and in the end bought a Wii, I'll just settle for the free company phone.
While Joe Consumer may drool over the iPhone, it's probably the company purchasing departments and CEO's that need to be wowed for the purse strings to actually loosen.
It's like deja vu all over again.
I paid $400 for my treo (with contract), and fork over about $100/month to verizon to use it, and it sucks. But, I need the functionality, so that's that. There isn't anything that is better enough at the moment to cause me to drop the treo and buy something else, but I might go for the iPhone. As for the GPS, the Treo is also lacking there, my Fiancee's $200 LG V has a spectacular GPS navigation system that we use literally all the time. But, the Treo is far more useful for email, IM, ssh, and occasionally using the web. The LG V is also usable as a Bluetooth modem right out of the box, another feature we use all the time. I still haven't been able to get the Treo to do that, and it's much newer and much more expensive. Also, my Treo's battery lasts about 18 hours, doing absolutely nothing, the LG V lasts about a week. If I actually use the Treo, the battery life is much shorter, just using IM can kill it in 3 or 4 hours. Also, the Treo is a terrible phone. I have internet access (EvDO where I live) 100% of the time, but I often cannot make calls, miss a lot of calls, and drop calls. There are always trade offs, the iPhone is no different, but it does seem to be pretty awesome.
Frag 'em all...
SK has been king for quite a while. There's some with Blackberries, but mainly the reason the SK rules is that TMobile allows a data-only plan which ends up around $30 or so a month after taxes. I had a SK for a few years but I wanted a more open platform that could do more such as video playback, so I went shopping for a Treo. Sad thing was everywhere I went they refused to allow me to have a data-only plan.
Hello I'm DEAF. I will never ever use the phone at all. Still I'm supposed to pay $40-60 for a basic phone plan and THEN add $20 or so for the data, what a privilege. That's when I really figured out why TMobile has most of the deaf people using their device. Unlimited text and data for less than a regular voice contract, that's NICE.
So if Cingular allows a data-only plan for this they'll pick up lots of deaf customers but also the people who simply want the phone to play with and develop on... or who hate cingular which leads me to believe that they won't allow data-only. I also doubt that their $20 a month unlimited data plan will be allowed on this phone, they're gonna want to charge more since this phone will encourage more net usage than a more clunky phone.
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
I've been a Treo fan because I get phone and PDA in one package. I paid $499 for the 600 when I upgraded from a 170. My company did not pay for it; I did. Frankly, I couldn't care less about iPod capability, but I can see how it would add considerable value to the package for those whose lives revolve around music. What does it for me is cool phone with new features plus what I would call "near-robust" internet connectivity that goes way beyond Blackberry's push email technology. They've got three cool things in there, and I figure if they can get you to want two out of three, you can justify it financially and they've got a sale. They do not need to get you on all three. In terms of competing with Treo and Blackberry, they are way ahead on that point alone. They will own high end, end of story.
:-)
I hope they can get away from Cingular exclusivity as soon as possible, though I have had good luck with Cingular with a good plan, good price, and effectively unlimited minutes with rollover. It will be easy to remove the chip from my Treo and plug it into a iPhone. Given the infrastructure build on Cingular's part I understand why they did it, but I hope other carriers will make the changes necessary and find a way into this. To me it does not make marketing sense to go exclusive forever.
Given what they have done with Google Maps I think the iPhone is ripe for GPS. That would put it over the top for me. I don't use it very much, but when I do it is extremely handy. Plus it will knock the GPS-only systems out, or at least force them to reduce their sky-high prices. Navigation in a vehicle is $2K plus and the stand-alones push $1K easy.
In terms of "Apple arrogance," get over it. Around here that is the pot calling the kettle black.
How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
As The Register points out, we should all be cheering for the iPhone because it'll kickstart competition. Finally, someone is showing RIM, Palm, Sony-Ericsson and Nokia that nobody buys smartphones because their smartphones *SUCK*.
If this brings some innovation into a pretty stale market, that's great for everyone.
it got awfully iPwned from so many angles quite quickly.
34486853790
Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
And before the iPod the most a person had paid for a portable music player for many years was around $50, and usually way less. Which probably explains why the iPod was such a monumental failure. The point is that using devices that have little in common with the iPhone for the purposes of setting the price is pretty useless.
I still haven't figured this out. iPods without a replacable battery is bad enough. They are cheaper and I would hazard a guess that they are not used/charged as much. I will not pay $600 for a phone if the battery is not replacable for a reasonable price. ...It does looks hot though
It's brainless to think that Apple will not come out with a simpler, cheaper model in six months. Everybody knows they've been working on two different phones. The surprise with this annoucement was that they brought out the smartphone first.
This makes sense (IMHO). You launch your product in a small, dedicated, technical market first and then bring out your average joe consumer market product when you've got the wrinkles ironed out.
As for that dedicated market, people like me have been waiting for a phone like this for a long LONG time. I've spent well over $1300 on smart phones in the last 9 months and have been disappointed with them all. I couldn't give a damn what it costs - I just want it to work really well.
I am not interested in articles about life extension advancements.
Sprint has $15 per month data plan. Unlimited use. I use my Treo as a cellular modem with my laptop often. I just upgraded to a 700p and haven't tried it with the new EVDO service with my laptop, but internet access is positively smoking on the Treo itself. I wonder how long the Cingular tie-in will last? I'd love to have an iPhone with my Sprint service.
"That's why half the people who show up to buy a Toyota Corolla drive away with a Prius. ("Hmm... $5000 more and I have a hybrid AND get bluetooth and that neato screen")"
That neato screen is a major reason why I drive a Jetta instead and is likely to be the big issue for me with the iPhone. Sure it means that Toyota can put a lot more functionality into the control UI (just like Steve said!) but it sucks if you have to do anything in a hurry (especially if you don't want to stop looking at the road).
There's a reason for all those buttons on phones. Tactile feedback rules.
I await all the reports of car crashes caused by people trying multitouch moves on their iPhones in heavy traffic....
Because if there's two things I've learned in the corporate world, they would be: A) Companies love spending more money than necessary, and B) Bosses would love to encourage their employees to listen to music on work time. Get real. No non-progressive-hippy business is going to buy these.
Only 21 people out of 1,800 spent more than $500 for a phone. And the point of this useless survey is?
Almost all phones bought by consumers are subsidised by the telecom companies. PAYG & contract - both are subsidised to lower the monetary entry barrier, attempt to attract customers from rival networks or to provide you with new features (video calling etc) to enable you to spend more money with them.
A survey which tests that ony 21 people bought such a priced phone is pointless. People who spend $100 on a new PAYG phone are actually probably getting a phone worth more around $200-300 if you attempted to buy it directly without any network lock-in and company branding. Thus the iPhone will actually retail in the $100-300 margin depending on how much demand there is for it - not at all outside the levels of christmas present shopping.
The RAZR isn't the competition; the $500 iPAQ is. When you compare the iPhone to other devices with similar feature sets, the price seems much more reasonable. It's just unfortunate that Apple decided to name it as a phone, when it is much more.
As for whether the entire smartphone industry is dying, that's another question.
I'm sure most of those 21 will go for the best available, which will be ,without a doubt, iPhone. Also, outside US, people are willing to pay more to the cellular phones. It looks like InStat survey covered only US population.
"admittedly more of a handheld computer than a cell phone"
End of thread.
Cingular. Seems they are in the process of changing their contracts to state that customers can not become part of a class action lawsuit.
iReality is the new hotness.
... but I would pay a thousand dollars for the iPhone if it's as good as it seems. I've been holding off on a phone upgrade for eighteen months waiting for this phone.
You could be on to something. This is (in some way) similar to the Sony mylo. Granted the Apple take looks much nicer, and includes cellphone and PDA functionality instead of just "on-line communicator" functionality (which makes it actually useful).
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
* No finger-feel to it, can't use it under a table or without looking at it
I sometimes snicker at this comment with respect to phones, but I've wondered thise about the iPod since day 1; maybe Slashdotters can clarify for me.
Is there any way to use/manipulate an iPod without looking at the screen? All I've ever noticed on them is the touch wheel, and while that's cool when you're sitting down, it's a bit cumbersome to have to look at your mp3 player just to change songs.
It's probably just me, but my mp3 listening basically consists of a huge playlist set on random, while I'm walking around/riding the train. I don't think I *ever* look at my mp3 player's screen. When getting to work I just hit the power button by feel. Sometimes it's nice to be able to lower the volume when an announcement goes out on the train PA.
So, Slashdotters, as someone who's needing to replace an mp3 player soon, can you do what I want to do with non-shuffle iPods? Change the volume, skip to the next song, and turn the thing off - by feel. Is this even possible?
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
The Blackberry and Treo are lousy phones, and only slightly better organizers/email platforms.
iPhone makes them both look like something from the Soviet era.
And if I recall correctly, the iPod was introduced at a similarly high price, with pundits complaining
that no one would want to pay that just to hear music. Now, iPods are handed out as party favors.
My only complaint is that they didn't make it cell carrier agnostic.
Mission: To provide products that consume time and energy as entertainingly as permitted by the laws of thermodynamics.
- a laptop computer with police software, and optional wireless link,
- a police two-way radio,
- a cellphone,
- a beeper,
- a taser,
- a firearm with extra clips,
- handcuffs.
The first 4 can be replaced and bettered at lower cost by far by an iPhone.This is the sort of product that changes the way we work. Imagine you're a cop - here's how the iPhone will make your job easier:
In a desperate situation an officer could set his iPhone up as a monitor and take cover elsewhere, knowing that everything the iPhone sees is being sent back to the central database as evidence. Add some autofocusing and AI to this and you've got R2D2 on your wrist.
Junk like this is why the iPhone will sell: (just one example) http://www.baddesigns.com/cell-phone.html
Complaint 1: "The battery is sealed in". This is pure FUD, nothing in the keynote or on Apple's website says that the battery is sealed in or not sealed in. The keynote graphics did indicate that the SIM card slot was internal, so taking the back off is possible, and therefore battery swaps seem likley to me.
Complaint 2: "Lack of third party apps". Possible FUD - Apple is strangely silent on this issue. We don't know if it's locked down like the iPod or as open as a Mac. For all the complainers know it might have Apple's rosetta technology and run Mac apps out of the box!
Complaint 3: "No 3G". FUD. Steve broke with tradition and pre-announced a 3G version in the keynote.
Complaint 4: "Terrible 2 year contract". Pure FUD. No details of what you get in this contract have been announced. It could be anything from $10 a byte to all call and data charges included in the sticker price.
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
If this thing came with Gps I would definately buy one. I'd even get another credit card if I had to.
I can't believe Steve Jobs demoed google maps and didn't mention anything about wether the iPhone would have Gps. It looked from the pictures like he was demoing Gps. He said it would be revolutionary like it would be if it had Gps. I even saw news articles and a widely referenced blog claiming it would have Gps. "Integrated GPS combined with Maps.Google will deliver localized search"
There is speculation that future versions will have Gps. I assume that it will. You can't neglect such an important feature forever. Hopefully in the meantime there will be some kind of bluetooth Gps solution that will give me the direction I need.
I'm going to sound a little like an Apple Fanboi parrot right now, but the marketroid pestimist idiots are out writing articles again about things they don't know and poo pooing things with very limited amount of thought, so I must speak out.
Steve made a very simple but obvious point. It's a phone plus an iPod. A nano costs $200. He's also right that a lot of smart phones cost between $200 and $400. Just look on Palm.com right now for the 680, 700, and 750 and you'll see Steve's right. And from what I saw in the demo (mind you, yes I know it was a demo) it looked like it could do things that would make palm user's quiver and drool, and make the execs at Palm, Inc. crap their pants.
You can get better deals, but you have to work at it and get a little lucky. You could go with a 680 for $200 and a shuffle for $100 if you don't need the space, but then you aren't getting the memory on the phone. I was able to get an outstanding deal from Earthlink for a $100 Treo 650 about a year ago. However, to make it an mp3 player I had to buy an SD card. I bought a 4 GB for $50 recently. I also shelled out $20.00 for a decent MP3 program because the MP3 player program on the 650 sucked big time. Finally, I bought an audio jack adapter for $5 because phones use 2.5 mm jacks while stereo equipment like iPods use 3.5 mm. I got a good deal on the phone but you can't get that anywhere any more, and in order to make a useable MP3 player I had to shell out $75 more. That $75 any smartphone user would have to invest in current phones, and that doesn't include itunes sync capability.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
[at the risk of being flagged as redundant...]
While the initial price offering of the new gadget seems a bit high for a phone, there are several things to remember:
1) If you recall, the initial price of the Treo 6xx was high, too, but providers subsidize the cost if you sign a contract.
You pay something closer to what the device is really worth but you give a quart of blood over to privider. You pay now or later.
It's important to remember this: the phone ain't where the providers make money. It's a service industry targeting a monthly revenue stream.
2) The "iPhone" (Apple's not Cisco's) currently has no peers which makes it alone in its class and price range. When a competitor comes along, that may change. However, competition in the iPod market didn't change the premium iPod's price but it did change the product line to include a wider scale of products and price points. There will probably be a few lower-end type iPhones appearing in the rev cycle this time next year.
3) It's cheaper than first batch of P900s!
4) Don't forget that this is a pretty cool device--the cool factor sells units.
5) The iPod, Phone, and Internet Appliance combo sort of justifies the higher cost--it's not much more than a Treo but it seems to kick it's ass. I'd pay an extra $100 for that. If I don't have to carry my Treo and an iPod and can get by without my laptop, that's totally worth the price to me--if it really works as advertised.
I don't know about 10M units by 2008. I think Apple might sell half that by then. Cingular is definitely a deal breaker for most people. My $15/mo. flat fee for Sprint's 'net access is pretty good. The data plans from Cingular will definitely put this device out of the range for most people. The WiFi option will definitely help as a consolation.
Time will tell. I didn't think the iPod or the iMac were anything special when they first shipped but they sure surprised me!
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
What percentage of the market has spent more than $400 on a phone that doesn't completely suck?
I'd happily rush out to buy one to replace my Treo, except for one major problem: You won't be able to install your own software on it.
It's quite a pity too, because it looks like it'd be a lot of fun to develop for. I imagine that the restriction may be due more to Cingular than Apple itself -- hopefully there's still some way that people could manage to persuade them to change this.
Don't underestimate the loyalty that the Apple brand garners. It's much like Nintendo's. They'll buy whatever is the latest and greatest.
And like Nintendo, the customers are loyal with good reason.
I think Apple isn't all that interested in 'taking over' the high-end cellphone market as much as they're interested in defining a new category of communications device that's not thought of as a cellphone.
I agree with that, but think they made a pretty big mistake while doing so.
That mistake being...calling it the iPhone. It's already led to a lawsuit.
The name is corny and overplayed. "iPod" worked well because it was a new formulation. An undefined term "pod" that was given life.
After a few minutes of reflection, I think "iComm" would have been better, or "iPad", even.
+&x
Sure it has flaws, but that's the price you pay for bleeding edge technology.
I imagine by the time the device is in it's third generation it'll be a much more robust and functional product. Unless they decide to keep right on pushing the envelope, cramming in every little piece of cool they possibly can.
sudo killall humans
Except for Cingular.
I hated AT&T wireless. I've had poor experiences with Cingular. Now, they're rebranding as AT&T Wireless.
This is a brand that was hemorrhaging 10% of it's customer base A MONTH until the Cingular merger. There's a ton of badwill there.
Not to mention the lack of 3G capabilities. I've gotten used to Sprint's EVDO, and it rocks. I use T-mobile for my voice, and Sprint for Data, and there really isn't room in my lineup for an iPhone.
Any serious data user needs 3G; either WCDMA, UMTS, or EVDO. EDGE just sucks, and I speak as a daily long-distance commuter with GBs of data transmitted over both EDGE and 3G. Any data device using EDGE isn't a serious data device.
Even so, I'd purchase an iPhone as a PDA/Phone/iPod replacement (without a data) plan, especially cause I imagine the OS X syncing capabilities to be excellent. Except for Cingular; I won't touch those motherfuckers with a 10 foot pole. More expensive, far greater # of dropped calls, terribly customer service. Go with Sprint, and get a nextgen network, or go with T-mobile, and get cheaper prices, better service, and vastly better customer service.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
The biggest problem I see for Apple (other than getting to use the trademark "iPhone") is to change the current general consumer culture/expectation.
At least in the UK the vast majority of mobile phone users expect to get their phone for "free" and change it every year. With the iPhone costing rather more than "free" by a couple of magnitudes it poses a problem.
What Apple does have in its favour is that it has a high profile consumer brand which is perceived as "cool" by just the sort of person who "buys" the disposable phones currently. This same consumer group would probably pay of a convergent device if (and only if) it is seen as a new "cool" product which is a fashion item. That it's compatible with their old iPod is a major bonus.
The big problem for Apple in Europe is the lack of 3G and MMS and the extortionate data call prices the telcos charge their customers. Unless they can fix these problem before the European launch it would make seeling the device here extremely difficult.
Agrajag: "Oh no, not again!"
The iPhone isn't a cell phone. At the very least, it's an iPod that can make phone calls, certainly an amalgam of portable devices only one of which is a phone. Comparing it to a vanilla cell phone is a spurious exercise. At the very least you should be comparing it to a PDA. A Treo is ~$500 from Verizon, which would be a better comparison if a Treo was even remotely as sexy as the iPhone...
Just give it a though. When the firs iBook appeared, it was priced at almost the same as any other WinTel laptop, but as of today, $1099 for a MacBook is twice the price you will pay for a similar specd Dell... Now, with the iPhone, you get a sub $500 Mac OS X laptop... really cheap is you think it this way...
Think about it. Most people who buy phones just want a phone that works.
I doubt it. Given how much most people spend downloading ringtunes & other crap, I think they want phones with bling.
Unlike myself: I'm still using a 5-year old phone - it works, and I see no reason to buy a new one (and new headset, car adapter, etc).
From the last article:
Shortly before the iPhone's release, Dean Hall, a seven year software engineer for Motorola, explained in an email the limited usability of an unlocked phone:
"When a phone is unlocked it loses its privileges on a provider's data network. An unlocked phone can make GSM calls and send basic SMS. No MMS, no Internet, no iTS. Apple would either have to reverse engineer a method to gain access to the data network (unlikely as most data networks require SSL-level security to access) or it would have to offer something different."
Gee, Dean, then how the hell am I doing it with my unlocked, gray-market E61 on Tmobile? I have everything except iTS - EDGE internet, MMS, email, etc.
Either Dean was misquoted, taken out of context, or this is just a fabrication. Unlocked, "unauthorized" phones work just great unless the provider tries to prevent their use. Tmobile sure doesn't.
I was walking down the street a few weeks ago and saw one of those guys whose job it is to wear a sign, also wearing an iPod shuffle. That was when I realized that any cachet the iPod had was gone. Personally, I could care less, but for many people, it's important. I think Apple's trying to ensure that the iPhone doesn't start out a mass-market product. Rather they'll price it high so that people associate it with the rich, successful, first-to-own-cool-things crowd. Then when it's popular, they can reduce the price -- a bit -- so the rest of us will buy it. It's the same reason why luxury product manufacturers don't all want to sell their stuff in WalMart: while you gain volume, you lose margins and pricing power. Who wants to sell a commodity?
> Remember the iPod? The iPod mini? Slashdot said they'd fail.
Slashdot slagging a product means only that Slashdot types don't see the value in it, not that 'consumers' won't buy the shit. We all understand that Steve Jobs could sell turds at 200% profit margins and more power to him. It is immoral to let suckers keep their money.
And you know what? I still don't own an Apple product, no iMac, no iPod and you can bet your ass it will be a cold day in hell before I'd buy a closed platform like the iPhone even if they solved the other flaws. And no I don't care that an ignorant slut like Paris Hilton will almost certainly have on on launch day.
Open standards and open platforms are important. If I buy an mp3 player it will probably be a Sandisk, after Rockbox porting reaching the plausible stage. First player that I like from a physical and raw specs view AND from the openness aspect. Others have been open enough but failed in other ways to win my coin.
But the iPhone not only fails the openness test it fails because of being bundled with Cingular for two years. Either leave the cellphone out like Nokia is doing or get the industry together and put the phone part into a seperately replacable module that everyone can standardize on. I want the ickiness of ALL of the cell carriers abstarcted away from teh computing parts.
Democrat delenda est
I will buy an iPhone whe it hits the $199 mark. It will probablt be the no screen "iPhone Shuffle", life is random, you will never know who you called...
I seem to recall that Jobs said it was "1% by 2008"
By 2008 several things will have happened. First, I'd anticipate that the price will have dropped by then. Second, anyone want to take a bet that the "multiyear exclusive deal" with Cingular is 2 years? Third, it will have undergone at least one revision (possibly with an "iPhone Mini" or somesuch in the middle). Finally, a lot of people will be buying new cell phones and possibly changing providers.
1% sounds extremely high to me as well, but it has to be kept in mind that they aren't talking immediately and this thing does a lot more than most smartphones.
Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
It is expensive, even for a smartphone. That had always been my major hangup. I liked the concept of a smartphone, but $150-300 was just too much in my mind for a cellphone. It's not that I couldn't have come up with the money, but to me it was too much. I have one now because my employer decided to get us smartphones. However cost played a factor there too. The provider gave them to us for $150 with a contract. I doubt they could have been convinced to spend much over $250.
I think the price is just going to be prohibitive for a cellphone. Yes there's the "but it's just not a phone!" argument but ultimately, it IS a phone and that's the category most people will put it in.
place those calls during the Keynote? After all, the iPhone was not approved by the FCC.
ps: Yes, I know this question has no practical implication what so ever. Just the legal curiosity.
I was all set to unload six bills on this plus whatever the service cost, until it was revealed that it's a closed platform and Apple will not be releasing developer tools for it. As much technolust as I have for the device, if it's a locked appliance, I don't trust it.
I hope they change their minds about this, because I'm OK with the high price and the rest of the restrictions. But if I can't code for it, no sale.
-- http://frobnosticate.com
And like Nintendo, the customers are loyal with good reason.
I would have to agree 100%
AirSpeak - http://itunes.com/apps/AirSpeak
Try adding 8 gig of memory to your Treo. That's right, it will only take 2.
You understand that your Treo *could* be used as an MP3 player but you choose to use an iPod instead. I won't quarrel with you over that, there are a lot of very good reasons many people spend hundreds of dollars on iPod's to do something their phone already does, and they put up with fumbling with an extra device to do it.
iPhone lets you ditch one of your devices and the cost is ultimately the same. Ignoring of course that you can not get more than 2 gig of ram in your Treo.
Did you see, the shiny new Treo 750? It is a very nice smart phone, $500 with a 2 year contract. 60mb of storage, 2 gig max.
And you still need an iPod.
Platform advocacy is like choosing a favorite severely developmentally disabled child.
I would get on the list now, but Cingular doesn't have coverage in my area:-(.
The phone/pda/media player itself is one of the best things I've seen in a long time.
But it won't really be great until you can use it with other carriers-otherwise Apple is limiting itself to buyers who have decent Cingular coverage, or to folks who just want a really nice wireless PDA.
That's what Sony say about the PS3. I don't think it'll work there either.
Belief is the currency of delusion.
HTC's phones are much better.
But they are relatively unknown outside of XDA-dev and Pocket PC circles.
My Blue Angel came out over two years ago, but I can do more with it than with an iPhone:
HTC phones are the best in the world for tech users. The only reason iPhone gets the hype is because of Apple's brand.
It's the same reason iPod sold so well, even though iRiver's H140 / iHP-40 is superior in many ways.
I think it's completely misleading and off-the-mark to compare the iPhone to a cell phone, at all. The only reason we're tempted to do so is because it has "Phone" in the name. But that's almost as absurd as looking at a $2000 "Apple" computer and calling it expensive because you can get an "apple" at the grocery store for 50 cents.
They had to name the product something. But the fact is, you could remove all the phone-related features from this product and it would still be worth $499. It's a PDA and a music and video player and a web browser and a digital camera. It's practically a desktop computer for all the things casual users need. And it's 10 times easier to use than most products in any category you want to put it in. I mean, you point with your damn finger. This is a fucking amazing device. It was amazing yesterday, and it will still be tomorrow.
I agree with that, but think they made a pretty big mistake while doing so.
;-)
That mistake being...calling it the iPhone.
I have to agree, they definitely should have called it the MacPhone Pro!!
Every time I turn around someone quips up this bit about the Ipod wasn't going to do well, the iphone will have the same fate and be huge. First off this a completely different market, you have competition and almost everyone already has a cell phone. Plus it is 600 OMG teh hax dollars. What was the predominate thing that everybody reported killed sony this year in the console war? Oh thats right price. *thinks... oh wait these are apple elitist*, Nevermind you should be just fine with the price my bad.
Did someone say cake?
They've tended to be expensive, and stay expensive. Even the iPod is fairly pricey to this day. However with the iPod they had a unique situation in that they quite literally created the market. There'd been MP3 players before, but they were geek toys. Nobody bought them. The iPod changed all that, it wasn't an MP3 player as much as a fashion accessory. Having one was cool and to be cool you had to have one.
Well, cellphones are already there. Everyone already has a cellphone. There' no market to create, only pieces of it to try and grab. You aren't trying to convince people they need a new device, they already have one, you have to convince your device is the one they have to have.
That doesn't mean Apple is down and out or anything, but all these comparisons to the iPod aren't really valid. The cellphone market is a very different beast in a very large part because it's already extremely well established.
CmdrTaco on the release of the original iPod: "Lame."
Result: Arguably, Apple's most successful product ever.
CmdrTaco on the new iPhone: "They're going to print money with this thing."
Predicted result: Sell AAPL. Now.
Why I think the iPhone will succed:
I've seen all these posts trashing the iPhone. Some of the criticisms are quite valid. (Cingular lock-in) A great many I find extremely stupid in that they are rants about false facts. (ie: 2 hour battery life when Apple stated a 5 hour)
The Good:
- sleek compact design
- OSX (strong system foundation)
- Responsiveness, which appeared to be quick, simple, and functional
- Potential for innovative multi-finger work-flows. Paging thru with a finger slide is much more effective than back/forward buttons. And I am sure developers will come up with even better ideas.
- Strong user interface. Effective use of drill/slide down menus and interfaces.
- Ability to utilize widgets (expect to see numerous 3rd party widget mini-apps)
- Strong browser support on a portable PDA/Phone device.
The Mixed:
- 4/8gig = GREAT for a PDA/cell phone, but not so hot for an digital media player. I think many would like to see a 3rd model that albeit slightly larger offers and 60gig+ drive.
- announcement 6 months before product available. Officially they did this because they were going to the FCC and once done the major designs would be public info. Most new phone products are discovered this way so this makes sense as a valid answer. This also gives Apple 6 months to potentially improve any flaws. Perhaps add HSDPA service.
- GPS, is this available or not and to what extent? Is it celluar location good enough to let you know there is a Starbuck within a 1/4 mile but not good enough for driver navigation. A popular app with PDA devices.
- Price, $499 expensive for a phone. But about the same as a PDA Phone + iPod Nano. In fact, if I recall correctly iPod's were quite expensive when they were first released. I recall like $399.
The Bad:
- iPhone Cingular biggest flaw. This is probably the #1 block to sales. And the likely reason I won't have an iPhone anytime soon.
- Touchscreens provide no tactile feel. No matter how accurate and intuitive no way exists to easily utilize the touch screen without looking at it. You can't feel the buttons.
- no SD/min-SD/micro-SD support
- Edge no HSDPA, but the final specks may not be there. Furthermore, this may have been a marketing blunder. HSPDA sounds lame marketing wise. Where as "Edge" has a sound that convey's leading edge technology even if it's far from it. I'll cross my fingers. But it's a shame this isn't available on an EvDO capable network.
- Exchance Server access is key, but they are providing PUSH thru Yahoo! Access to Exchange Servers may come later.
- Screen easily scratched.
There are some solutions to these. I have a touchscreen on my PDA. I bought an old Palm screen protector and cut it to size. I did the same for my mom's iPod.
Another issue that could have some intelligent solutions is the lack of tactile dialing. I've been saying for years an easy solution would be to build a touch screen phone flat and then provide a leather cover (These were common for PDA's a few years back.) But incorporate some new technologies. Namely, a dial-pad and a bluetooth connection. Then your iPhone case is connected to your phone and allows you to dial under the table. In fact, you could remove it and have it function as a full keyboard. Why no one develops this crap I do not know.
I am avowed that most companies don't have a single designer with much more than half a brain. Apple, I think actually has better designs than most but only come about 80%-90% of the way.
I can hold off until it prices around $39.95 in a few years at Weird Stuff warehouse.
The Cingular PDA Data plan is $44.99 a month for unlimited. Cheapest is 5 MB for 19.99. I wonder how Cingular will be working the plan fees for the iPhone.
When a man lies he murders a part of the world.
Scoble pulls the battery life comment out of his ass, is too lazy or stupid to look it up on Apple's website, then says this (see comment #84): "Darryl: I will buy one. I'm sure it'll be a huge success no matter what anyway. Steve Jobs got EVERYONE to talk about it. There isn't a single person I've met that doesn't already have an opinion on it."
Once and always a Microsoft apologist, our Robert Scoble, but one who wants an iPhone anyway.
Like I said, a tool.
Id like a phone/DAP/PDA combo, but I have zero plans to switch carriers. They should have sold the phones unlocked with the option to choose your own carrier. Then there is the lack of a tactile interface. I often dial by feel rather than sight, with a touchscreen, that is now not a possability. Finaly, the lack of a physical keyboard is another downer for me. I HATE using on screen keyboards, and really fail to see how this one will be any better than others. At least give us a slide out keyboard or maybe a stylus. Then again, I don't plan to switch to cingular/AT&T so it really doesn't matter to me anyway. So close, but not quite right.
My smartphone is similar in that all dialing and call control is done on the screen and is made to work with just fingers. It works fine but it is really strange not having tactile feedback. You don't realise how much you miss it until you do't have it. It means you can't blind dial very well, but even when you are looking at the screen it just feels wrong. I find myself using my phone book a lot for that reason, even though memorizing phone numbers is something I'm quite good at (I never bothered with a phonebook on my old phone).
So while touch screens are neat, they aren't all that they are cracked up to be. I also wonder how text messaging will work on this. On the model I have, there's a full keyboard that slides out and works pretty well. On a touch screen they keys are going to be small enough that without tactile feedback I see fat fingering as a real easy thing to do.
Or simply becuase there are MANY who do not wish to switch to Cingular/AT&T wireless.
Right now you can buy third party software (games) for a 5G iPod, though the selection is limited. Apple has also gone through a couple of iterations of the underlying OS for the iPod, starting with an OS licensed from a third party, then bringing the iPod OS development in-house.
What many people seem to be missing here is that the iPhone is the first iPod to run OS X.
It would explain why Apple was so hesitant to get a 5G iPod SDK out into the hands of more game developers--they knew that they were going to replace the underlying OS with OS X real soon.
Further, the June/July timeframe is about when Apple would be refreshing their iPod lineup anyway.
It appears Apple needed to announce the new iPhone because they needed to make an FCC filing, and they'd rather announce it themselves than allow people to broadcast rumors of the phone based on its FCC filing. By hammering for two hours the message that this is the iPhone, Apple has managed to engage in its classic strategy of indirection: everyone is so expectant about a new iPhone that no-one is talking about an iPod lineup refresh, nor is anyone talking about other computing devices that may or may not show up in the June/July timeframe based on the iPhone touch screen/portable device UI/OS X technology.
"Sure my Treo 650 isn't nearly as sexy. But sexy wears off in a few days and productivity and ease of use are what I care about long term."
Funny, I said something remarkably similar to my wife just a little while ago.. I write this from the couch.
I'll believe in corporations having personhood when Texas executes one... - advocate_one
[Is it possible] That most people won't spend over $400 on a phone because there aren't any phones worth spending that much on? The high end market may be small... but there's no reasoning given for not spending so much... maybe it's just because nothing (until now, IMO) has been worth the extra $$?
I didn' think so, back when they rolled out the Motorola RAZR, with it's sky-high initial asking price. Now I go to the pub and there's about 5 people there with them. The RAZR is becoming ubiquitous and there are no shortage or people with gripes about them.
I think the worries on the iPhone will prove about as damning as those of the RAZR. Some people carry around their own Reality Distortion Fields, so I take the doubters with a granule of NaCl.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
1. Cingular
2. Price (Apple) just crossed from overpriced to are you kidding me? range)
3. Lack of tactile (kinesthetic) feedback while typing. Ever tried one of those virtual keyboards? Your fingers will rebel about 20 seconds into the experience.
That being said... Looks over function crowd will snap them up. Good luck with the 10million units goal though.
$signature =~ s/$signature//;
According to the numbers presented by the OP, more than 1% - the market share Apple is after - spend more than $400 on a device. It's sounds to me as if Apple has done their homework and knows exactly what their market is.
The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
A lot of your contract price goes into subsidizing the phone, i doubt many people really understand what their phone costs. I wonder how many of those 1,800 believe they paid nothing for their phone. The networks love to (and probably have to) hide the true cost of their service or else nobody would buy it.
I spend about $900 a year on phone + service + data. The iPhone would add another $175/yr into that mix - less than a 20% premium over my existing phone.
Let's sit back and enjoy the negative comments from Apple haters wanting to look really cool and outside-the-norm for bashing a superior piece of technology that's already left them behind.
That "true believer" truly is an iTard. His entire understanding of the mobile market seems to be gleaned from searching Handango for cheap shareware games.
Some have unique platforms for programs (such as Verizon's BREW) that end up only offering expensive junk games, while others have third party development (such as Palm and WinCE / Windows Mobile) which tends to result in being insecure and unstable because the various apps that get loaded are prone to crash the system.
You forgot BlackBerry and the Symbian-based devices from Nokia and Sony-Ericsson. If you're going to spread FUD, don't be a coward and pick the easiest targets. The fact is, none of these devices have had any widespread security issues, due largely to the fact that malware authors tend to go for lower hanging fruit. BlackBerry, Symbian, and Windows Mobile have most of the same protections that desktop operating systems have, and employ code signing to guard sensitive APIs and to verify the source of applications. The Apple "iPhone" is no more or no less vulnerable - being a closed system is simply security by obscurity.
By the way, has being a closed system prevented the iPod from having issues, in both stability and functionality? What makes you think the first generation "iPhone" is going to be different?
I hate cell phones, I hate the disposable nature of the industry everyone just disposes of their old phone and buys the latest and greatest when their contract expires. Perhaps a phone like this can change that. I think it really depends on the carriers and the rates that they offer. I hate cell phones. Did I say that already? But I'm really considering an iPhone.
Early adopters and gadget freaks are the target market of version 1 products.
The kinda people who are already carrying a $500-$600 phone, or a combination of $250 pda, $250 ipod and $250 phone.
The original iPod launched at $400/$500 for "just an mp3 player" and people made the same cracks and quips.
But not so much anymore. They 'get' that the interface really did make all the difference. They 'got' that the early pricing was for early adopters. Even early adopters know they're getting raked over the coals. Everyone's aware-of and ok-with how this works.
Apple will have something priced to joe-six-pack in a year, and they'll have carrier choice in two.
// "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
I can type 30 WPM on my hiptop, and could do the same on the Motorola T900. I suspect Blackberry users feel the same.
Does anybody remember the Chiclet Keyboard controversy of the late 1970'sand 1980's (Commodore PET, TI Home Computer?) Jobs ought to -- he was there, and the Apple ][ had a real keyboard. (Well, it couldn't display lower case, but at least the keyboard worked.)
oh yeah, the iPod.
It's too expensive. Is the market worth it. Nobody needs it. The current market can do all this already. My device is better because of x.
etc, etc.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Put them all together and the spell FUD!
Well, UFD, but the F should always go before the U.
Otherwise we couldn't say "F U!"
OK, I'm done.
-- Boycott Shell
I give 99% yes. Most phones have it for 911 location.
Apple had to find a network willing to do a couple things against industry standards. One, the provider had to go hands-off and let the manufacturer dictate the phone specs. Two, the provider had to take the unprecedented move of actually changing its network in order to handle the new functions that the manufacturer wanted (asynchronous voice mail). That provider had to be willing to make those investments just to handle one brand-new entry into the phone market. I'm betting Cingular is just the one that was willing to take the plunge.
Don't be too sure. They apparently went through many, many iterations of screen materials to get one that was just right in several criteria, which likely included scratch resistance (especially after the 1st gen nano complaints).
This wasn't in the blog itself (http://paul.kedrosky.com/archives/2007/01/10/the_ five_bigges.html), but in one of the replies to them:
"I have zero interest in this cell phone. But I would love some version of this phone on my business desktop. Current business phones are atrocious. How to do conference calling, holding, transferring is just impossible to remember. Voicemail is a disaster. If they built something to work with PBX and the ability input contacts from Exchange then a $600 business desktop phone is probably cheap. I could see them making a lot more money in that space."
All of the disadvantages of using the iPhone as a cell phone disappear if it is targeted instead as a desk phone. Like the poster in that blog comment, while I have zero interest in the iPhone as a mobile phone (too fragile, too many cases where I need to "blind dial"), I would KILL to have that interface on my desk phone.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
First I'll admit, I pretty much am a zealot. But many people's dismissal of the product before they see or use it in person is very typical of the telephone game we call the Internet. I saw over here somebody saying this so I'll take it as fact. The truth is we still don't know very much about the product. So let's stop assuming things and think they're set in stone.
My number 1 gripe with people's assumptions is that the iPhone will be a 100% closed-product. This is bunk. Firstly, nobody official has said anything close to that. Just that development kits are not available at this time. Why is that? Let's think about it.
MacWorld is very much Apple's own personal CES. Takes place at the same time for more or less the same purpose: to introduce new products. This show is not so much about the developer because Apple already puts on a giant show just for them, WWDC.
As is widely known, Apple went to great lengths to keep the product a secret. So duh, no development kits were given to even the most tightly NDA'd partners. This thing was even kept secret to most of Apple's OWN employees. So it stands to reason they didn't want to mass-produce developments kits to have available at announcement. Beyond that, third-party software will undoubted bring up alot of flaws in the iPhone-specific parts of the OS and API. I'm sure they don't want somebody else's software mucking with the device at launch that could make it unstable or worse. That isn't to say they don't want third-party software running on it -ever-. Just not at first.
And I'm perfectly okay with that. This is a first-generation device. An Apple first generation device! These tend to be flakey. It does take time to work out the kinks and I'm okay with that too. I'm fairly sure that a dev kit will be available at or shortly after WWDC (hey, that's in June too... hmmmm). They just want time for people to use the device as they intended it.
Concerns about battery life are irrelevant at this point. We don't know how long it will really last. Could be better or worse than everybody is touting. But you know what I couldn't care less either way because I don't spend more than 5 hours per day mucking with or talking on my cell phone. I'm lucky if I can get an hour on even the most smartest of smartphones (and believe me, I've gone through alot of them). I'm willing to be most people won't either.
As for price, puh-lease. Go buy a Cingular 8525 (the super-duper 3G pda-phone that runs Windows Mobile). Aside from WM5 being the most sluggish piece of software on the planet, you'll find that it costs $585 (granted without 2yr contract). That's the same ball park. Same with the Blackjack which is $350 (again, without 2yr contract) but both phones come with negligable internal storage so add on another $100 for 2GB Micro-SD and you're still not close on storage. Some people like removable storage because you can swap cards. I have -never- owned more than 1 memory card for a format, so again, I couldn't care less. Especially considering 8GB is fairly substantial.
So I think most people's fears are overblown. The concern that could be given weight is the QWERTY touch keyboard. But that is a philosophical thing that has to be one way or another. Either you have dedicated tiny buttons or you go virtual and have a large screen. My side on this one is the large screen & virtual keyboard. That's just my preference. I have no need for tiny, fingernail splitting buttons so small that I accidentally press the wrong ones so I much prefer a keyboard on a large pretty screen that I accidentally press buttons on. Even if I wasn't such an Apple whore, I'd side with Steve on this one. Dedicated, ugly micro-keyboards suck (I'm looking at you, Blackjack). The 8525 was, for the most part, comfortable and quick to type on though.
Anyway, I'm sure the next few months will be filled with iPhone bashing as people speculate till their heart's content. I know I'll get one (I've gone through 4 different phones in the past month looking for one that doesn't suck) but the iPhone could very well disappoint me in use, but I won't know that until it comes out in June.
I just wasted your mod points! HA!
Soon as some programer types get there hands on this device it will be unlocked and running on any GSM carrier. If its OSX based then you will see plenty of Linux/BSD ports fot it. People wine about no GPS. All phones have GPS btw remeber e911. Writing software for it or porting something like GPS drive shouldn't be to difficult. What im curious is obtaining some hard tech specs. Like what processor its using and how much memory is availiable. With all thos creative programers out there it will be interesting to see waht come out of a device with full touch screen. Oh and its a phone too...
It's a Newton on steroids. It has everything the Newton had, except that the launch is in a time period where people actually see the value of PDA-like devices and it has all these additional features the Newton had only with the PCMCIA slots, that is cell phone and wifi.
I currently have 2 cell phones, mp3 player, I would have bought a Palm soon, but I reconsidered for the iPhone. My car/home/pocket is full of devices and chargers and when I take a plane or so, I have to have a fanny pack to carry it all in.
The iPhone isn't going to be a pops-and-mom cell phone that you get for free with your year-long subscription, it's going to be used by people who bought the iPod and/or the Palm, all the Mac-fan zealots, girls (and boys) that would like to make a fashion statement and every geek I know that knows OS X has a 1337 command line and that you can run full-blown cocoa apps on there. I mean, you should be able to just run (Apple/Microsoft) Remote Desktop on it as well as an SSH client or VNC, any Java app ever made, MP3's, WAV's, MOD's (given that you have enough storage for all that stuff), it doesn't have a stylus that you can lose (like the Palm or Newton), it has the finest display known in any portable device.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
My biggest question is- what's the iPhone MADE OF? If it's the same material as the iPod, watch out. Anyone know owns an iPod knows that the finish scratches if you so much as look at it wrong. Cases are an absolute necessity & even then it can still get scratched. I have to keep clear packing tape on mine UNDER the skin case or else bits of pocket fluff get under the skin & scratch it all up. Judging by the design, cases are not exactly practical for the iPhone so damage is going to be a problem. Not that this little concern made up my mind or anything, I already wasn't going to buy one b/c A; my Treo 700p kicks more ass than any trendy gimmick phone ever could(it doesnt need a sensors and visual voicemail to be cool), and B; I'd sooner gargle diarrhea than EVER switch to Stinkular.
A rare breed- a female slashdotter
The QWERTY keyboards on the current generation of smart phones is silly when the keyboard is so tiny you are forced to type with two fingers anyway. These phones need a new keyboard layout optimized for typing with two thumbs. QWERTY ain't it. When or if it comes along, the Apple iPhone can make it a user preference. Try that with your silly buttons.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
Are north american wops willing to trade in their Razr's for iPhones? If they are, are from word of mouth at work they are, then Apple can easily reach that 1 million figure. LOL
There are any number of phones that can do Google Maps, IMAP e-mail, take photos, play back MP3s, record movies, show a picture of someone when they call you, tell you the weather, browse the web, sync with your Mac, and so on. My tiny Sony Ericsson will do all that.
The iPhone is a phone like those, but with a somewhat better web browser, and a really pretty UI. On the minus side, it's large and locked down so you can't run your own applications. My current phone will at least let me put whatever Java MIDlets I want on it and has a free SDK I can run on my Mac.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
I know that one guy from google is on apple's board, but still. They made a special version of Google Maps, so don't tell us there's NO third-party software on it!
-- Boycott Shell
"we are stuck with technology, when all we really want is stuff that works"
That's it really. Current high-end phones and blackberries are nice technology, but the iPhone is stuff that works. That's why it'll sell very, very well.
As for me, I don't plan to upgrade my PII-400 computer, I only ever buy the least expensive cell phone and only when the one I have is broken, I don't have a TV and don't want one.
But I will buy an iPhone. A palmtop that does all I ask my computer to do, a phone that actually works properly, a good mp3 player and a wonderful UI are all potentially worth some of my money. A device that provides all of this and more definitely is.
1. I'm programming cell phones and PDA's for the last 2 years and I cannot believe in the announced power consumption. .Net compact framework, etc... Because processors are small, memory is limited and power is VERY scarce. Man... we are talking about ARM processors (I don't know if apple will use them), not Dual Core Pentium 4. It's not like a laptop that you are used to get 2 or 3 hours off the batteries. A mobile phone with less than 2 days of autonomy it's extremely annoying.
We have all this set of software platforms and frameworks like J2ME, C++ for Symbian,
2. I'm wandering what will happen to that screen after a good fall from the table. And what will happen to the accelerometer after the 2nd fall? I'm not saying the gadget won't last, but after seeing some broken touch screens from some HTCs, I have some doubts.
3. Touch screens get really greasy.
After this, let me say that I hope apple gets the best success with this good locking product. If this happens, the competition will certainly improve their products... a lot.
Math is beautiful... e^(pi*i)+1=0
But in this case I refer to Jobs, not the community at large.
$500 for a phone isn't worth it, but as a pda/ipod/phone, hell yes. This thing is too big and cool to just think of it as a phone, but as the real pda I've always wanted with phone functionality. The key part of the pda aspect is not the browser or Google maps, but the funky 3rd party applications that people would write, I would write, to extend its usefulness. Games, personal database stuff, hell even a stupid tip calculator would make it worth just that bit more to me.
*But* there are reports in this very discussion that there will be no 3rd party SDK available. In that case, they've killed a *lot* of what I wanted it for and will stick with cheaper phones. At least my razr, for all its flaws, can run my custom java apps.
And that's why I want it. Frankly, I was willing to get it even without activating the phone; now I'm not sure I want it at all.
GPS and 52 more gigabytes. If this phone had the funtionallity of even the base line Garmin GPS and the storage capacity of the current video iPods. I would be buying generation 1. Three of my favorite toys in one!
However, Cingular coverage is full of huge holes in Iowa, so the device is crippled not by apple but by the cellular provider. Verizon is not perfect but it does provide me statewide coveratge (save for one of 99 counties).
P226
The PS3's problem is that Sony didn't make them. They have generally been selling out about as fast as Sony makes them... it's post launch and people don't camp out, but they aren't sitting on shelves for weeks.
Sony is being bailed out... they produced an overly complicated device that costs too much to make and is hard to get components for. Rather than doing the normal brain-dead console maneuver of selling at a "console price" and eating losses and sell-outs, they are selling at a premium price that is still selling out. By the time they fix their manufacturing problems, they will have sold everyone willing to pay a premium a PS3, and they will sell at a normal price. I expect the PS3 to increase in supply and drop in price $50-$100 every 3-6 months as their supplies increase and costs come down... that will happen in parallel.
There is a shortage of components, that means that the price of components goes up (even if Sony makes it in house and doesn't update their transfer pricing), but it will get fixed in time.
I'd say that Sony was pretty smart, the "normal" approach to the manufacturing disaster would have been to sell them at $299, each $500/device, and watch them sell on eBay for $1000+... The fact that the eBay price rapidly dropped to MSRP means that Sony is pricing about right.
I almost agree except that it's really, really hard to come up with a good "redefining" name. Except for a few almost simultaneously-released & poorly named products (Nomad, Archos), this was a new product giving people capacity, a "one place for all your music" device, and "Pod" really highlighted that selling point.
If the selling point of the iPhone is to be its "one place for all your communication" feature, well, what short, marketing-friendly word embodies communication and hasn't been used for something else?
The good words are all too long and/or boring: Communicate, Socialize, Connect, etc?
You could do something like "iComm" but cutting off a long word makes it bulky and, well, cut-off so it just sort of hangs there. iPad implies writing & drawing, which presumably people wouldn't be doing much. It's not a tablet, it's a communication nexus. (iNexus?) You want something you can imagine people saying in their everyday life, like, "Wait a sec, I have to put on my iPod."
Too bad "iTalk" is kinda spoken for already by AppleTalk. I think "Phone" is just about the best word available for describing a solid communications device.
Frankly, I can't think of, and haven't heard from anyone else, a better-sounding name than iPhone, except one idea, if they'd kept it part of the iPod brand as an "iPod Phone" or something.
It's called a "T-Mobile Pocket PC Phone Edition". I've got one. I don't use it... I carry a phone, a Palm, and occasionally an MP3 player. And put together they're not much bigger than the T-Mobile Pocket PC.
* Touchscreens on phones suck dirty swamp water through used oil filters.
* Battery life in fancy phones is bad enough as it is, without having it play music as well.
The iPhone isn't going to be a pops-and-mom cell phone that you get for free with your year-long subscription,
That's the point, isn't it? More than 99% of phone users get something that's at most a couple steps above that. So to get the remaining 1% of the cellphone market (which is what Jobs says he's trying for) Apple will have to get 100% of the geek market, 100% of the snob market, and 100% of the style market.
OS X has a 1337 command line and that you can run full-blown cocoa apps on there.
On the iPhone? We'll see... its only got 4GB of Flash. You can't fit OS X in there. If it's got anything like a complete OS X implementation that can actually run desktop applications I'll be astonished. In any case the odds are it's using XScale, not x86.
Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
I will by this one, not for the phone-features, that pale in comparison to my SE phone (GSM+3G, 3MP Camera, FM-radio, integration with any blogg, et cetera) but for the iPod with wifi-features. The fact that it also works as a phone is a more of a bonus than the killer app.
I don't even own a cell phone, but when I saw it, I wanted one.
It covered most of the electronics I use at home and let me go mobile with it.
Telephone: Voice calls: check
Computer,Stereo, TV: Music: Check, Images: Check, Video: Check, Surf net: Check, Games: ??? Likely.
So it fits in my pocket and gives me all the geek access (time suckers) when I am outdoors. Hmmmm.
Keep that damn evil thing away from me....
- iPhone Cingular biggest flaw. This is probably the #1 block to sales. And the likely reason I won't have an iPhone anytime soon.
- Edge no HSDPA, but the final specks may not be there. Furthermore, this may have been a marketing blunder. HSPDA sounds lame marketing wise. Where as "Edge" has a sound that convey's leading edge technology even if it's far from it. I'll cross my fingers. But it's a shame this isn't available on an EvDO capable network.
You, of course, realize that this works both ways. If they went for Verizon and EVDO, there is no way I would have the iPhone anytime soon. Of course, the 2nd rev will be 3G but that this time when most of the HSPDA network isn't rolled out, it shouldn't be a priority (this is coming from someone in an HSPDA coverage area). But I'm very glad this is GSM and not CDMA so you can actually use this phone in more places than just the US.
I just wasted your mod points! HA!
> I'm jealous that Steve Jobs is selling appealing technology products to the broad market.
/. article where Carmack was speaking out on the PS3 because he is competent to speak to the subject. By the same token I really wouldn't care what Mr. Carmack's views on the minimum wage happen to be.
No, I don't care what the 'broad market' likes. The broad market you worship likes Paris Hilton, Reality TV, Windows on low quality Dells, crappy beer and doesn't know enough to care about the closed DRM hell Apple wants them to live in. They can have all of it, glad it makes their ignorant crappy existence bearable.
> This may be because I feel challenged by common acceptance of complex technologies.
The iPod is the end product of decades of a trend for how new technology gets mass marketed. The Compact Disc was probably the last 'open' standard. Sony & Phillips didn't believe they could get away with a closed format so they licensed it to all and sundry, becoming rich in the process but not obscenely so. Then Sony tried the closed thing with their next few ideas and was slapped around by the market. But industry has been learning, and His Steveness is the clever one. The iPod is about as closed a platform as one can imagine but he has figured out how to get everyone to ignore that and do truly stupid things. Now most new things are coming out as closed as they can make them.
This is depressing. Knowledge brings fear. (nod to Futurama)
> I don't understand that, in spite of Paris Hilton being a waste of carbon, promoting a product
> is wickedly important and most celebrities aren't even paid shills
The sort of ignorant people who follow the antics of Ms. Hilton are swayed by celebrities. I know better. I couldn't give a flying fuck what some actor thinks about tech, politics or anything else other than acting. Or what some jock thinks about anything other than sports. Now I did read today's
> I'm hoping you won't notice that Apple is remarkably open in their standards choices. I will continue to
> spread FUD about iTunes/iPod being 'closed' simply because I can't dump a huge folder of tunes onto a USB
> mounted drive.
Exactly. When I can mount an iPod as a mass storage device, i'll call that part open. When I can replace the firmware I'll call the hardware open. (Yes I know old iPods could boot any software but ones for sale today can't.)
When I can buy tracks at the iTunes store and play them on other players I'll call iTunes open. (I'll even concede the FairPlay as needed to crack open the market.)
Seriously, you have drank so deeply from the Kool-Aid you think iPod/iTunes is an open platform? And anyone who doesn't agree is spreading fud? Get a clue.
Democrat delenda est
That mistake being...calling it the iPhone.
I have to agree, they definitely should have called it the MacPhone Pro!!
It will cost US $1,200.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
I've gone through the negative comments.
Scobeliser: Former MS blogger and still *loves* them, so no surprises there. Gets a major fact wrong (updated) to Apple's detriment. GSM + Cingular is teh suck.
Adrian Kingsley-Hughes: Screen will scratch (agreed). Cingular is teh suck.
Paul Kendowsky: cannot ring by touch. closed system (yeah OS X is *real* closed). Cingular is teh suck. Vapourware (well duh, no product yet, but that doesn't make it vapourware). Waah too expensive.
Jupiter: apple extend only (that I cannot believe, you will see lost of non-apple code for this). No support for some MS Office stuff (maybe this will mean office will provide some open standards support). No 3G.
Interestingly only a few of the comments are about the actual hardware. I have two addition potential hardware issues in mind:
- Greasy screen, you will be putting this against your face
- lack of tactile feedback on "buttons". This could be an issue. The fact that buttons have edges make it easier to use buttons than pseudo buttons. I'd be interested to see if then turns out the difficult to use. Particularly for fat fingered people.
Still, neat hardware.
meh
I agree, but... I am not a marketroid. What the 'troids understand and I do not, is that normal people need to "get" what it is before they will pay for it. The iPod was clearly a music player, a well-established class of device, so an abstracted brand name works. The iPhone, on the other hand, may very well be an entirely new class of device, in which case "iFoo" is a terrible branding decision.
"What hell is an iFoo?"
"Well, it's a kind of super-phone."
"But it looks like a video player."
"That's because it *is* a video player."
"...huh?"
So I think the strategy is this: call the sucker an iPhone, so that everyone on the entire planet "gets it" instantly. Apple is all about simplicity, so this makes sense. The weird gadget with no buttons is a PHONE! It's like a Treo, but 100 times cooler. And, hey.... wait a minute... it's also... it's a friggin' COMPUTER! It's a pocket Mac that makes phone calls! Whoa, dude!
Then, after everyone has had time to wrap their heads around it, declare that you could not resolve trademark disputes with Cisco, and stop calling it the iPhone. *NOW* you can rebrand it as something entirely new, because you've created the category awareness - you've got everyone knowing that it is not simply a phone, but a phone replacement. You pay off Cisco for their unwitting contribution to this guerilla marketing campaign, and you've just instantly (well, almost) established an entirely new class of consumer electronics that everyone wants before it's even available for sale, which is very, very, very difficult to do.
I think that they are trying to sell a device for profit. I have no doubt that they did their research, and that the market will purchase enough of them for apple to make money.
I do not think that apple is trying to: take over the cell phone market, revolutionize an industry, reform communications fundamentals, or any other crap. They are TRYING TO MAKE MONEY.
I know there were other post's on the insurance but also don't forget, isn't this an Apple product? Will there be Applecare for it? I know I have purchased it at 20 dollars (I think that was the price) for 2 years for my iPod. Apple has replaced my iPod for free twice already within that contract. No questions asked, even when it was clear that I had damaged it through fault of my own (dropping the blasted thing enough times until it cracked).
21 out of 1800 is 0.0116666667, or 1.16%.
Apple, manufacturer of the most popular mp3 player ever made, with over 60% market share, develops a device which delivers the sales-proven features of an 8GB ipod Nano, adds widescreen video and image support, sales-proven features such as email, chat, a calendar, a fully-functional web browser, and numerous UI bells and whistles like a touch screen with smooth scrolling and zoom. Then, to ensure familiar performance for their current customers and reliable compatibility with their other hardware and software offerings, they build it around the OSX platform--one of the top two home-consumer operating systems on the market. To top it off, they integrate a quad-band GSM cell phone that will run on most international networks. Then, to ensure their desired 1% market share, they partner with one of the largest cellular service providers in the US, pricing the device at a point comparable with other bleeding-edge smartphones. An early survey shows that 1.16% of consumers (21 out of 1800) have paid over $400 for a phone. No mention of how many of these consumers also own ipods. Days after its introduction, Cingular reports being flooded with calls about the phone. This is an uncertain market?
Paint up an old Concept and call it innovation...
Once again, Apple is pushing this thing like it is the first of its kind. The only thing somewhat 'unique' is the mult-touch display.
Beyond that everything this phone does is ALREADY in widestream use and available on tons of phones already on the market. Feature for feature, it barely is above a low end Razor, and doesn't even come close to a Windows Mobile Phone that not only does everything the iPhone does ALREADY, but also allows third party application development, and can run applications like remote desktop where I can remote into my home or office computer from my phone.
This doesn't even begin to start on the multimedia features, Windows Mobile doesn't lock you into iTunes, it doesn't even lock you in Windows Media that is included with Windows Mobile. Next take office applications and realize that there are versions of Word and Excel and Outlook I can run on a Windows Mobile phone, and iPhone won't be compatible with Office, that would be ok, but Apple WILL NOT allow any third party development, so unless Apple provides a Wordprocessor or a tool, you WILL NOT be able to use it on the iPhone.
This is one of the most closed software/hardware devices in history, so I am very shocked that any good Slashdot person would see this as good in any way. If you want somewhat open, you would be better off with a Windows Mobile phone that you can already buy, as you can at least develop your own applications and tools for it.
Apple, I am tired of your marketing and 'innovations' that are old concepts to the computer tech mainstream. The iPod was not innovative, Creative had models almost 5 years before that were doing the same thing the iPod did, just not in a cute case, the Mac was NOT the first 64bit personal computer (by 10 years even), and the Mac was not the first computer to have CDR burning abilities, and the iPhone is not anything new that I can't go buy a Windows Pocket PC Phone and do today.
Just because Steve'o Jobs says so doesn't not make it reality...
It's worth mentioning that 21/1800=.0117 which is over 1%. Sheesh.
The timeline goes like this.
2002: Wiggers argue that there's no correlation between race and intelligence because neither exists.
2010: White scientists complete initial mapping of human genome.
2011: Jeffrey G. Brown anally raped to death by niggers. Dies in denial.
2020: White scientists identify a complex of genes which are associated with blond hair. Wiggers insist that everyone has this including niggers, so there's no genetic basis for the idea of race. Blackstar dies of AIDS.
2025: White scientists identify complex of genes which produce blue eyes and fair skin. Wiggers insist that everyone has this including niggers, so there's no genetic basis for the idea of race. 2026: Private maternity hospitals invite parents to specify the hair and skin colour of their unborn children. Wiggers insist that this will fail and is racist because everyone chooses blond, fair-skinned children.
2040: White scientists identify the "intelligence gene". Wiggers, enraged at white parents specifying blond fair skinned children, call such parents racists. They have no comments about black parents who do the same.
2050: Private maternity hospitals offer parents the chance to boost their unborn blond, fair-skinned child's IQ to Asian levels. Wiggers don't believe this possible because IQ isn't inherited, but this doesn't stop them screaming "racism".
2060: More and more Caucasians are being born blond and fair-skinned. More and more light-skinned blond niggers are also being born to black parents as the technology gets cheaper. Niggers insist that it's OK for them to have blond children since all DNA came from Africa and the child is still 100% theirs.
2065: Correlation between black skin and criminality rises to 100% as *all* crime is now committed by low IQ genetically unmodified niggers. Wiggers blame racism, the legacy of slavery, niggers' lack of Caucasian looks, and everything except residual black DNA.
2070: Western governments offer fetal IQ enhancement free to all prospective parents.
2100: Niggers noticeably thinner on the ground in western populations. Those born as niggers are all in jail for life by their 16th birthday; the others are born with Caucasian looks and IQs, but otherwise with their parents' DNA. By 2100, a nigger is as instantly recognisable as a Jew: i.e. usually not. Western societies prosper since the cost of correcting nigger DNA is lower than that of imprisoning them as adult criminals.
2110: As with Downs Syndrome in the late twentieth century, early termination of pregnancy is routinely offered to blond, fair-skinned, high IQ ancestral 'niggers' whose unborn child shows signs of developing NFA (negroid fetal anomaly) syndrome. Although children born with the syndrome can often live useful and happy lives, most will require special schooling, will be unable to function normally, will have a low IQ, plus an ugly appearance and lowered life expectancy. Almost all such children are aborted.
2150: Sickle Cell's great-great-great-great-great-granson runs a fertility clinic. A white couple come in one day for a consultation and scan. Sickle Cell VII scans the pregnant woman's stomach and reports that, despite previous genetic intervention, the child has a 1 in 50 chance of being born with NFA syndrome. The parents-to-be are confused. Why is this happening to them? Sickle Cell junior is sympathetic. 150 years ago, he explains, you were niggers, and although your DNA has been repeatedly upgraded to white and Asian since then, sometimes throwbacks like this happen. It's like Jews suffering from Tay-Sachs disease, he explains gently. They nod and ask for a termination.
2200: niggers are just a distant, bad memory. Everyone is white or Asian. The world's navies cruise off the coast off Africa, sinking the dugout canoes of AIDS-immune niggers who attempt escape in hopes of raping white women.
30000AD: history professors discover a strange prehistoric archive of data called "slashdot", documenting the tension between superior beings and an inferior
a non-random sample of teen age girls (relatives and their friends) in our upper middle class neighborhood indicates that 100% of them want an iPhone NOW! they don't know/care about 3G/GSM/GB etc...... facebook/youtube/IM/ring tones and so on is what they care about..... doing things like sending mp3's via IM to other iPhones- or showing the facebook page of who you are talking to- is more likely to be the killer app then a full featured calendar or any of that "work" stuff (the key app for me will be navigation)
Let's see, the RAZR came out priced at $800, $499 with a 2 year Cingular contract. It sold well over 10 million in its first year at those prices. Given that it's basically a stone-age device in comparison to the Jesus Phone, 10 million sales should be a walk in the park for Apple.
I think everyone is missing the fact that this is the touch-screen movie iPod that people for dying for. A true video iPod, definitely in the $499 and $599 price range. That's how much the top of the line iPods are. So, what's the problem with the price? I'd be happy that I'm getting a video iPod + the added benefits of a cell phone, WiFi, etc. for no additional cost!
Check out the original /. community prediction for the first iPOD - Same comment -- that it's too expensive! If history, and NOT slashdoters, is proof or prediction, this little gadget'll do right as rain in the market, it will...
First article appearing on /, about the iPod: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257
Use of the product by celebrities will not be likely until Apple prevails in the lawsuit over the Trademark, which itself is extremely unlikely given that the ink has been dried on the trademark name for a phone for nearly 7 years (the mere fact that Apple approached Cisco over use of the trademark name and entererd into previous negotiations could be prima fascie evidence that Apple knew ahead of time that they did not own the trademark and hence embarked on public use of the name with intent to deny Cisco the benefits of their trademark (and hence have subjected themselves to additional damages).
Any celebrity doing so prior to the resolution of the tradmark dispute so would open themselves up to penalties that might come to those who may be perceived as colluding to illegally using a trademark owned by another party. That would be the kiss of death for celebrities. For many if not most "celebrities" these days, about the only thing they have going for them is being able to being seen using other people's products.
So as far as singing another tune, my sense is that Apple and its shareholders will be singing another tune (besides "Wishful Thinking"). This might be especially true if Cisco decides to use its resources and buy or enter into a strategic relationship with Apple's cellular phone provider. Now that would be a statment by the 500 pound gorilla that it really is the 500 pound gorilla and one might expect that Apple could be easily swallowed if the gorilla really gets hungry.
The thing with cellphones are, up till now, most of the frequent customers have been younger people concerned about their phone as a "fashion accessory" as much as anything. They don't really have the disposable income required to plunk down $500 or more for a phone they'll probably end up losing or dropping on the pavement and breaking in a year or so ... but they will kick in that extra $149 or even $249 for something perceived as "trendy" or "cool", along with a new service contract. (Then they'll buy those $10 designer faceplates and antennas with blinking LED lights on the tips, etc. etc.)
... but that's more of a side-effect. I think I see where Apple is going to end up with this - and it's not a bad place really. It's going to secure them a spot in "high end cellphone sales", for the small percentage of users who demand more.
This helped sell an awful lot of low to mid-priced Nokia phones (remember when everyone wanted one that looked just like the model Fox Mulder carried around in X-Files TV episodes, for example?), and is helping move quite a few Motorola Razr phones most recently. (Hey, look how THIN it is? Cool!)
Apple is bucking the trend here, and asking people to consider paying a lot more for a device that converges several devices people have already been buying. (Think of it as 1 part iPod, 1 part cellphone, and 1 part hand-held PC.) Sure, it has all the "trendiness" and "flash" that the stylish crowd demands - but this isn't going to be an "impulse buy" that all the teens can afford.
Rather than this ending up like another iPod, where it seems like *everybody* owns one (or even 2!), this could be more of a Blackberry/Treo killer. The corporate CEOs and traveling salespeople who keep loads of contacts and schedules in their phones will think nothing of moving to one of these - especially if it's a business tax write-off anyway. If integration with Mac OS X is tight enough, it will also tend to sell to Mac "power users" who have traditionally been frustrated with phones lacking good sync capabilities with a Mac. Of course, it'll catch the "early adopters" and generic "gadget freaks" in its net too
"Gee this iPhone is a phone like no other, blah blah blah.."
..."
"Internet, Music blah blah
Huh ?? For fully featured phone see http://forum.nokia.com/devices/N95
"Touchpad.. blah blah"
Yes, it totally sucks !!! Imagine sending a SMS in -5C temperature (and windy)
without any real feedback on your fingertips..
Ok, yeah... the 21% of customers that bought an over $400 cell phone... I'm completely with you there...
;)
Consider this, though... what about all those iPod faithfuls that are poised to refresh their iPod with a newer model?
I have an old 3rd Generation 20GB b&w iPod that I've been wanting to upgrade... and the iPhone would be the perfect device for me. I've found that while it's possible to stuff my iPod full of music, there really aren't 20GB worth of songs that I actually care listening to... The video iPod is appealing, but I also need a new cell phone... so I'd be inclined to go for the iPhone.
The only thing that is holding me back (seriously, the only thing) is that Cingular is the provider. I've been a happy T-Mobile customer for the past 3 years, and I have no intentions of switching to a new carrier... not even for something as appealing as the iPhone.
At any rate, consider the fact that this phone isn't only appealing to the high-end cellphone users... it's also appealing to iPod users. People who are already going to shell out $200 to $400 for an iPod wouldn't really think twice about another $100 to $200 for an iPhone... especially when their own cell phones may cost between $50 to $100 (or more) anyway...
I think people who have had bad experiences with AT&T or Cingular are more likely to boycott the iPhone than people who think it's too expensive. The latter group probably owns a cheap cell phone, and doesn't own an iPod, I would think... so they're totally out of the target group.
Let me put it another way... I'd rather buy an iPhone than a PS3.
(and there is the occasional defense by true believers)
No bias here, eh?
All the comments I see here miss the big point. It doesn't matter whether the iPhone is a better telephone or a more expensive telephone. What matters is that it is a MacIntosh tablet computer that also happens to be a telephone. As a Mac tablet, its cheap (only a third more than the Nokia N800 tablet, but at least a third more powerful. The phone, from where I sit, is just a bonus, even if it is the point of the exercise and its initial marketing focus. Its almost worth switching to Cingular to have the computer. Indeed, if it fails as a phone, they'll just move it to 802.11g and rebrand it as an iTablet. Indeed, I'll be surprised if they don't do this eventually anyway.
Davis http://davis.foulger.net
When Apple, Inc. is done having the worm sued out of them for the "iPhone" name they can rename it to "phon-I"
I got this feeling when I watched the keynote.
I think you've got it here only I don't think it will be limited to a "communications" device
.... wait wait, did he say that right? "compete with origami"? yeah, I know - there's no market there ... yet ... the iphone will change all that because when apple releases it's handheld computer, it will be awesomely-featured and precisely-timed .... because they started people thinking about what can really be done with a really portable computing device
....
I think that apple went this direction rather than introducing a) a 'regular' touch- and wide-screen ipod or b) some type of handheld origami-type thing - mark my words, this is the start of the real future of personal computing - you'll have something like an imac or a mini at home for your main storage area and you'll use your phone or a mini computer and everything else wirelessly - wearable computers and all that jive are getting closer and closer to a reality
it starts here with the phone, in about a year you'll see these features in a stand-alone (no phone) ipod and apple will introduce a step-up device like this, but without the phone functionality to compete with the origami
I usually find that when I start getting nerdy and wanting something, it arrives about 2 years later - I wanted something like an origami/umpc for a while and there's just starting to be available - by the time apple produces something like that, the general consumer market will be ready for it
calling all destroyers
...and I hate Macs and don't own an iPod.
Time to buy some APPL I think.
--- These are not words: wierd, genious, rediculous
Polls like these don't take into account the flexibility of the market. Fact is, people don't know what they want until they see it. How many people were spending $200+ on an MP3 player before the iPod came around? A significantly smaller portion than Apple's current market share.
Apple's ability to acknowledge the flexibility of the market has been one of the reasons the company has done so well lately. Companies who cater to what polls say regarding what the market wants are doomed to create only kitsch products. Opinions are changeable, and the right product certainly has the ability to assuage public opinion. Apple is planning a revolution with the introduction of this phone/iPod/handheld computer. Is the revolution going to happen? Who knows, but I admire Apple for giving it a go and not simply redeveloping the same kitsch product we've seen a million times.
HTC made my T-Mobile Pocket PC Phone Edition. It could do all that stuff. I did pretty much all of that stuff on it.
It was a really really horrible phone, because it was too complex, it had too short a battery life, and dialling the phone on a touchscreen is frustrating... doing it in a hurry is just not possible.
Of course the iPhone will have all the same problems, it would take a miracle to avoid them.
Apple has always made their own markets. This is no different.
Was there a market for computers with colorfully designed exteriors before the iMac?
Was there a market for hard drive mp3 players before the iPod?
Heck, people argued for the longest time that hardware and software should be two separate companies...
The iPhone is merging many markets: iPod, PDA, cell phone, gps and laptop. Same price as a blackberry, better call functionality than most phones, wireless internet with google maps (arguably better than most gps systems), a full browser on top of a full OS, and what looks to be a useable and very dynamic input system. Plus because of the full OS I can confidently guarantee games somewhat similar to hand helm gaming devices. It also fits nicely in the price range of people who already have a desktop and would like a laptop but can't justify a grand on something they would only use in class or while traveling. I could probably justify the iPhone price on any two of those markets listed...
They'll buy whatever is the latest and greatest.
Without being flippant, can you insightfully answer Why? Apple shareholders can.
I actually read all the reviews hoping to find the chink in the armor before I dropped down my $600, I want the 8 gig model. All they managed to do is convince me it is a good device. The only point I'm curious about is the 2 hour battery life for movies. I questioned the 5 hour quote by Jobs so I'm curious what the truth is since none of the so called "experts" have ever used one and two days ago no one knew they existed. I say if you're stuck on a plane use one of the external battery packs. Would you be happier if it was 4X as thick and it weighed a pound? It's the state of battery technology not some Apple conspiracy, deal with it.
What all the detractors failed to address is the fact it's essentially a portable computer with a desktop OS. It's early technology but there is no limit to the potential. Already you have built desktop level email and some basic PDA functions but it has the potential to run desktop apps. I was stunned to see Core Animation running on it. This is a feature no one but Apple has. The price is dirt cheap for what it is. It's priced not much more than an early iPod yet it has a full wireless webbrowser, 2 megapixel camera and a cell phone. The interface looks extremely cool, you couldn't give me a blackberry with the tiny keypad. The entire approach is cutting edge. If there's other similar products on the market or on the way where are they? This is a first generation all in one device and they've done a stunning job.
The only hesitation I have is the two year contract. My first question will be about upgrading since I think the next year's model will be dramatically better. So long as there's a method to upgrade and decent phone plans I'm sold. For all the detractors why don't you super glue a Zune to a Blackberry. It might be ugly clunky and hard to use but at least it's not an Apple!
How is a BSD source history relevant?
Internet Explorer came from Mosaic.
The attraction to a Linux platform is the ability to change things.
Apple is mainly known for building walled-gardens, not really openness.
The BSD core makes it more reliable than a Windows one, I guess.
So how is this a news story? Apparently 1% is not unattainable.
iPhone is an instant winner, I think. It recognises that the long-touted convergence of cell phones, pdas and handhelds is (finally) here. This market has been waiting for a killer ap(pliance) that has the style points and conceptual breakthrough that may even keep the long-irrelevant MacOS alive.
My guess: Apple will keep building this position with some hits and some misses. If it can follow-up the iPod with another market mover, its going to make some shareholders very happy.
Guns don't kill people, bullets kill people!
Honestly, I'll just wait 'till I see the finished product to comment about it. I don't see any use in debating over something 6 months in advance with just a few ideas of how it will actually work and with no real-world use of it(unlike Vista).
Let's see:
Apple iPod Demand Iffy
Pundits compliment, criticize iPod
Favorite excerpts from that second one:
My amazing wife - Artist, Author, Philosopher - Laurie M
About four months ago I walked out of an AU store on the corner of Teramachi Sanjo in Kyoto. The trip cost me about 5000yen (US$45 or so) up front for the phone and activation fees. I pay 4000Yen (~US$37) a month for, as far as I can tell, unlimited emails and free calls under ten minutes. The phone is a Casio W41CA and comes with English support for most of the software, which allows me to play music, listen to radio, watch tv, spend money (ez felica, aka ketai saifu), find where I'm at via GPS, search the web with an Opera browser (mostly to check stock prices), take and edit pictures etc (alarms, clocks, notepads, customizable led's that indicate who has sent me an email...on and on and on).
The standby screen (maybe only AU) is a flash animation of penguins doing everything from stretching in the morning to turning off the lights at night. Besides the thirty or so cartoons that exist to make my day better, the penguins also tell me when the battery is low, help send emails, and ride the subway with me. No, I'm not kidding. There are that many animations. The user interface is a subway map. And there are three other animation sets that I don't use. The phone is absolutely amazing from the software interface perspective, and the screen is more than sufficient to let that aspect show.
The buttons are very large, have a very easy to feel rounded rooftop shape, and are adjacent to each other so that I write emails faster with my ketai than with a keyboard. The directional button at the top has a nice ledge around it that makes it very easy to navigate from it back to the keypad. The body itself is a flip-spin phone where the top part becomes the screen for the camera. Again, there are some extra buttons that make the design as intuitive as a camera as it is as a phone. They also double as volume and track/frequency when the phone is used to play music. Although the frame did not seem to me to be as stout as I would have liked at first, I breakdance all the time and the phone isn't broken yet. Either I'm lucky or it's good enough.
Perhaps the best feature of the phone is the IR port. They are fairly ubiquitous, especially compared to the states where I didn't even have one, and having an IR port makes sharing numbers painless to the extent that if they existed in the states, World of Warcraft would be about as popular as LARPG's. Simply put, it makes social networking far easier.
Knowing what I know now about the iPhone and my Ketai, I not only choose my Ketai that cost me essentially jack shit, but can't help wondering wtf is going through Apple's collective brain. The iPhone is not designed like a phone. It has horrid buttons. In fact, if I had to email with touchscreen buttons, it would be half as fast and a hundred times more frustrating, as instead of using touch-finger coordination, it would be more like hand-eye coordination. The screen is always open. I guess I should just buy an iPhone Racket Jacket since that's the price of being cool enough to have a iPod that makes calls, but my phone is a hell of a lot easier to take care of. I can already feel myself being angry at an iPhone.
I guess somebody recognized that the majority of phones in the states are horrible in comparison to what my 1800Yen (about $15) bought, and that having one gadget is easier than two. However, they completely missed the mark with flexibility. A phone has a complicated interface because there are more things to coordinate. A music player is simple because it doesn't need to be complex. Phones have enough buttons to act as music players no problem, but an iPod has nowhere near enough hardware to be useful as a phone interface. Thus we have the cop-out; instead of sacrificing the elegance of the clickwheel and admitting its defficiency with regard to being a phone interface, Apple has sacrificed utility.
The largest complaint I have is that Apple has simply introduced a gadget based
"There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell them." ~ Louis Armstrong
do touchscreen like Apple does it. Apple has bought fingerworks in 2005, which has patented multitouch - and made keyboards out of them. Jobs demonstrated multitouch in the demo when he shrunk and expanded a picture with the "pinch" - this is obviously multitouch and the old touchsensor tech can't do this. Check out fingerworks on google.
As a personal opinion, let me tell you why it may be 'the first of it's kind', even if all it's features exist in other devices. I resist gadgets as long as I can, even if they are a gift. Why? because each and every one has a learning curve and I don't feel like wasting my time on something that may be obsolete in 6 months. Case in point: the Palm; I have a friend who bought one a few years back when they were spanky new and he demonstrated it to me. He had to learn a new way to write the English language! He seemed to like it but for me, NO WAY! A device is there to make my life better and if I have to invest more than 2-3 minutes figuring out how to use it, forget it; I don't want it/I don't need it. I will not consider a 'smart phone' because all I can picture is a monumental pain-in-the-ass.
Now, along comes Apple and I get excited because I imagine my will being seamlessly translated into action, much like if it were an appendage to my body! (a little extreme, but you get the picture) If Jobs can make a phone like this then it's revolutionary and this is why Apple's competitors should be scared: While others offer 'features', Apple offers 'features you can use'.
I currently pay almost CDN$30 a month for basic cell-phone & data service (discounted, no-fee-cancel contract). For a tiny phone that doesn't even have a camera (so it won't get confiscated). In a Province that has the World's Most Castrated network. It's really too much for me to be paying for the amount of use it gets, but peace-of-mind and convenience wins out, like having health insurance.
There isn't enough bum-lube in the whole city for me to justify what the iDoowhacky costs in monthly fees alone. Sure it looks great, but really I'm just interested in an 80G touchscreen iPod, and that can't be far behind...
I remember everyone saying how the original iPod was too expensive, feature poor, no way it was going to compete in a market that already had the Rio, etc...
The iPod redefined the market for MP3 players.
As a long time Mac user, I've been listening to people predict the demise of Apple, the failure of it's products for decades.
The iPhone may be a disaster, or it may be as disruptive a technology as the iPod. Only time will tell.
Sara
Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
My guess is that if this were sold as the new iPod without the phone feature but still the connectivity and $100 less, it would be "the next HOT thing". Look at this as a nice connected iPod with a phone thrown in...
The fact is there hasn't been a phone worth $59, let alone $599 in the market. Every phone on the market seems to have a serious flaw. Too big, too hard/annoying, hobbled functionality. There have been numerous calls (pun intended) for simpler phones on the market partly because they can't do basic phone calls right. However, it looks like iPhone is worth the $599 just based upon phone calls alone. If I never use web, or the ipod functionality, I think Visual Voicemail, the IM style SMS, and the phone book look better than anything I have used. Let's face it, most phones on the market don't even have a decent phonebook, and it looks like they might have nailed it. Conference calling on many phones behaves as if you need to switch hook / flash the analog switch.
I think Apple could pull this off because I think they have just fundamentally changed the cellphone market.
(Caveat: I'm the Sr. Systems/Data Engineer for one of the top cell phone OEMs...)
Narramissic is probably a marketing wonk; the question he surveyed is skewed. While a small percentage of people buy top tier handset that retail at $400 or more, if you surveyed the question "have you spent $400 or more for BOTH your music player and your cell phone", THAT percentage would be much higher.
Devices that integrate two separate functions and allow the user to have to carry/hassle/charge one device rather than two typically initially sell at the premium the added convenience conveys to the user.
We have been manufacturing handsets that function as music players for some time now, but the US domestic carriers have attemped to channel music sales through their OTA interfacing at a premium and force the user to jump through hoops to "side-load" music for playback. When you add the iPhones ability to easily interface with existing iTunes player setups and be the ONLY alternative to playback DRM'ed iTunes music content, AND the superior design, Steve may just do better than 1`% of the market before he's through, and I'm no fan and would never purchase an Apple computer...
A mini-USB connector would have been great, you could unload your pictures from your camera on to it, you could connect an external keyboard if you wished, a printer, you name it!
Honestly, I think that the naysayers just don't get it. So few people understand what it is that makes Apple so successful (including a couple past CEOs). Again, this is not a phone, it is a different kind of device that allows us to interact with our data and with eachother in new and revolutionary ways. People already pay this much for an ipod. With millions of ipods sold why would someone NOT guy the iphone at only a marginally higher price considering the incredible wealth of extra features. People are going to buy this just to get the touchscreen interface for their ipod. Even if they don't watch movies or tv on the iphone or even use it to make calls or connect to the internet people will still buy it. Once again, inserting the iphone into the present concept of Cell Phone is clearly exposes the complete lack of understand most people have for the potential market and uses the device has. The iphone redefines the Cell Phone, and yes, whether it's the iphone or not, in 10 years THIS is what your phone will look like and do (unless the telecoms can kill the concept by not comprehending the promise in the business model). Personally I think that if apple opens up the phone to third party applications (widgets) the device will be successful no matter what.
As far as I see it Apple made two mistakes here.
1. Calling it anything with "Phone" in the name (stupid stupid stupid... it isn't a phone, why call it that?)
2. Locking themselves into the "Wireless Provider" business model which for lack of a better way of saying this isn't about innovating it's about exploiting near monopoly status to make bucket loads of money at the expense of their customers and service quality. The iphone clearly relies on the availability of broadband wireless data access and wireless companies today clearly relish the opportunity to so overcharge these services that only companies and not individual customers can really think about paying for them.
Those two mistakes are going to hurt potential customer's ability to see the iphone for what it really is and prevent iphone owners from using it in the way it should really be used. People who want an awesome new ipod will go and buy a new ipod rather than the iphone because they won't perceive it as being an ipod. Those who want to use all the amazing communication features the phone offers will discover that those features are so prohibitively expensive that they can't afford to think about using them for fear of Cingular also charging for doing that. Quite honestly, I'm not concerned about the price (I'd buy one today at that price) but the astronomical costs for wireless service are going to kill people's willingness to adopt the new phone. I was hoping that Apple could use that magic ability they have had to whip the Content Providers into doing their bidding into turning the Wireless Providers towards a contructive and viable new business model for 21st century communications. But... we'll have to wait and see.
You can go ahead and join the apple naysayer club but they've introduced an astounding number of innovative new products over the years. Some have failed, others haven't, but almost all those concepts are tremendously popular today in some shape or another. In most cases Apple simply jumped the gun by a year or two. Hopefully the iphone isn't another similar case. People have been saying Apple is going to fail this year for almost two decades. It's getting ridiculous, Apple is one of the few companies that get that innovating can actually be profitable. Now if only they can clone Steve Jobs and keep him on for the next few centuries they'll be fine.
Feature-wise, the iPhone is nothing new and fairly limited: an E-mail reader, a Google map viewer, a music player, a photo viewer, chat, calendaring, sync, and a few other small apps. Every major phone manufacturer has plenty of phones that do that. Furthermore, Apple's claims to being innovative are vastly overblown: there are plenty of phones with touch screen inputs, on screen keyboards, and all that.
But, Apple seem to have done a much better job on the details. Many of the other smart phones are infuriating and painful to use: complicated menus, bad fonts, confusing setup, annoying dialog boxes. That's the real reason to get an iPhone, provided it works as advertised.
In different words, iPhone doesn't look like a great phone to me, but it looks like it sucks less.
Put down the crack pipe. The phone won't be available for six months. I'm pretty sure the name dispute will be cleared up by then.
step 3: god dammit, it doesn't work
No Verizon. No hardware keypad. Lame.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Electronic gizmos always go that way: start out super expensive to sell the gotta-have-it price-is-object types. Then the price drops - hard.
I guess asking for both networks....is too much?
Most Americans don't leave the country regularly. Most Americans use CDMA networks.
I'm hoping that Cisco and Apple settle out of court; Steve Jobs and Cisco CEO John Chambers will duel in a pay-per-view broadcast hip-hop dance competition. Proceeds will go to the One Laptop Per Child association.
Yes, it is. You'd essentially have two phones by the time you added circuitry for both. The size required would literally be double.
I just wasted your mod points! HA!
So, having watched the Keynote, what I want to know is where are people getting some of their info. Specifically:
#1 - People are saying this is a closed platform. Steve said nothing of that. He said it was running OS X with core animation. I'm sure there will be support for xcode development. I'm also quite sure that this is running a light version of OS X, being just the OS core (darwin kernel + extensions and a new UI layer on top.) I'm not sure why Apple would make mention of the snazzy development features (software guts) at the product launch if he meant it to be impossible for 3rd party developers to add functionality. Apple may require a certification process, which would discourage open source development, but certainly there's got to be some programmability for commercial apps. #2 - Unremovable battery. Certainly, it didn't look easily removable in the product images, or demonstration, but Pogue made no mention of not being able to remove the battery, nor did Steve mention that at all during the demo. If the device had, say, 15-20 hours of talk time, this would be an acceptable scenario, but laptop users and cell phone users have LONG had need for easy battery swapping. I'd be hard pressed to believe Apple would really make that big of a mistake with the device. Also, given it's GSM status, it would only make sense that the back cover is removable to place in a SIM card, as REQUIRED BY LAW in Europe. It would only make sense that the battery would have to be swappable.
Why are people so convinced these lacking features are really lacking features just because Apple hasn't been specific regarding them? Or have they, and I just missed something somewhere. Please point me in the right direction...
Regardless of its advanced technology and 'quality', It was priced out of the realm of the mortal man, and the Iphone may suffer a similar fate if they dont drop that price some. ( or remarket it as a Ipda, or NewtII )
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Too big, no 3G support. Lame.
Rhapsody in Numbers
The iPhone won't even be available for months, but in the next couple of weeks you'll be able to get an FLC Neo1973 that runs a totally open Linux based OS and does 99% of what the double the price Apple phone does and lets you sign up with ANY provider, not just the ones Apple blesses.
"If anything, I could see this influence going in the opposite direction-- instead of the lack of Exchange support hurting the iPhone, I think you might see the lack of iPhone support being counted against Exchange/Windows."
Um no. Absolutely not. Exchange is a corporate messaging platform. There is no way businesses are going to give up Exchange features they use on a daily basis because of a phone. The users I've switched to Macs (because of their particular job) have a hard enough time dealing with Entourage's so-so Exchange support.
Sometimes my arms bend back.
Finally, after all these years, this is the Newton reborn, Phoenix-like ... but with superstrength, x-ray vision, and mental telepathy.
Steve called it a "leapfrog product" in terms of useability and communication? That's the understatement of the year.
It starts by integrating your personal data horizontally with your Mac's iCal, Mail, Safari, Notes, and Address Book. It will integrate externally with your Bluetooth devices, your personal networks, and your phone and internet networks. It integrates vertically with iTunes, and I'll bet easily with AppleTV; and with more to come soon.
And it promises superlative expandability, just like the Newton did. I expect Apple already has handwriting and voice recognition tools waiting in the wings, among others. Plus, we're going to see a gold rush of developers adding value to this device, both via software tools and hardware accessories.
And not only will this product sell like hotcakes, for it's explicit uses - this is the Trojan horse that will break the telcos wide open with its WiFi & VOIP - just like the iPod's already well along the way to doing to the music and movie studios.
But don't focus only on the media-sucking consumer, although the juicy appeal for that broad market is immediate and undeniable.
Instead, imagine the productivity boost this elegant multi-tool will give to millions of info workers who need to share and send discrete chunks of information in real time.
For many of these people, the iPhone is indeed a price breakthrough of major proportions.
Remember, think Newton, not just phone, not just media player.
Even better, because this super Newton - running OS X - can phone home, and sing and dance.
The range of possibilities are vast; and corporate America will soon be snapping these iPhones up in pallet-load quantities.
Custom apps using GPS tracking and transaction-processing tools.
Combined with RFID or barcode and Bluetooth accessories.
Conversing with networks and databases and nearby devices.
And many more places and uses that thousands of eyeballs smarter than mine will soon see.
Remember, the controls under that blank piece of glass can be easily optimized for whatever you'll need.
Steve wasn't kidding when he compared this to the Mac and the iPod, and he wasn't exaggerating, either.
This isn't just the Internet in your pocket; it's *everything* in your pocket.
It would have been fitting if he had paid explicit homage to Bill Atkins, HyperCard, and the Newton.
Nokia, Motorola, Palm and all the rest have just been plunked into the same category as MS Windows, Sony Walkman, and Zune.
The handset makers have seen their future, and fear that their fight will soon be for undisputed second place.
"Welcome to the social" you say? What a laugh! Here comes the real deal. A true Pocket Mac, wired to the gills.
I can't wait to see the 2008 models.
Welcome to the 21st century, my friends.
Make the thing waterproof.
All Apple then need to do is accessorise properly, in the form of swimming trunks with appropriate pockets.
Who wouldn't want to listen to calming music underwater, whilst swimming?
Here in Australia the 3G network has been in for quite a while and 4G is availible in I most of the country. A phone that costs presumably close to $1000AUD that uses such an outdated technology (GSM) is most certainly not going to sell well. I hope that apple realise this and include 4G support before they become availible here.
...I know I plan to buy one!
I have had Treos and then switched to a Windows Mobile 5 phone with a real keyboard. No matter how smart the software, the touch screen keyboard is not as convenient as the real keyboard. And then the unlimited data plan for a Cingular phone is much more expensive than the $15 per month data plan from Sprint with much faster download speeds as well.
Verdict - Phone looks cool but I am not going for it until both of these change.
I paid more than that for my phone AND my iPod combined... and i've had PDA's before, i'm looking forward to a good one.
I have ridden the mighty moon worm!
So Apple does have a point- why shouldn't it be able to carry on the naming tradition it started with its next product? There apparently have been similar rulings in the past, such as Toy's R us getting protection from others using its naming strategy (sticking R us on the end of things).
Certainly if you asked 100 people on the street who makes the iPhone, most would say Apple. This would have been true before or after Apples latest announcement. How come?
The funniest thing I saw today in the news was that Cisco's lawyer said they were acting to protect its brand. ? Who even knows what Cisco makes, outside of the IT community? Brand? My parents only remember Cisco because they lost a bunch of money on the stock after the bubble popped. Brand?
Now they are in the regular news again for the first time since the bubble popped to protect a name that everyone naturally associates with Apple?
Jobs said the iPhone OS was OS X. Let's take him at his word. A safe assumption is that it's Leopard.
I found it interesting that he made no mention of Leopard at Macworld. Or of iLife '07, both of which we know are coming. Thinking back to the WWDC and the talk of "secret features in Leopard" I'm left to wonder how many of those deal with the iPhone. Rumor has it that iLife '07 includes a spreadsheet app.
The iPhone appears to be a consumer device, but if Apple wanted to put a businesslike face on it they could include their own (perhaps MS-compatible) word processor and spreadsheet, and have it instantly sync when the phone is plugged in for charging, along with the calendar, etc. Allow push mail from anywhere and Microsoft will become irrelevant.
As for the killer app, I can think of one possibility, especially if we find it's integrated into Leopard: Skype, or an Apple-branded VOIP client. They'd have a hard time getting that past Cingular, but it would definitely sell a lot of iPhones in places where WiFi is free/cheap.
"Anyone else who considered buying a iPhone having second thoughts upon hearing there will be no 3rd party apps?"
Yes... I wish I could know for sure now, and I'll go ahead and get another phone if it's truly a closed platform. There's no way I'm spending that much money on a computing device that can't run the software I want. If they allow 3rd party development as an open platform, then I'll sign over my first-born son for one of these things.
"I like systems, their application excepted", George Sand (French)
Apple is NOT trying to corner the top 1% of gadget geeks any more than they were with the iPod.
Apple is only trying to corner the top X% market for non-luddites who still want to get laid. iMac or iPod, anyone?
Apple doesn't give a flying fuck at a rolling donut about geeks, at least not publicly. This is not Apple's stupidity so much as it is Apple's *business model*.
Third party apps will matter to Apple if and when hip, single, sexually active twentysomethings demand 3rd party apps.
Bluntly, Apple will measure this product's initial success on the prevalence of pretty people in New York and LA with disposable income who buy this. Seeing as this is Slashdot, that ain't me and odds are it ain't you either.
As far as price point and size, just wait for the inevitable iPhone Mini in two or three years.
Disclaimer: I'm not saying this product will succeed wildly. I'm saying that geek appeal doesn't enter in to it.
There is some interest in the iPhone with the blind.s ionaries.com/2007-January/thread.html
http://macvisionaries.com/pipermail/discuss_macvi
I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
I hope the iPhone is longer lasting than the iPod.
All my friends/family who have had/do have an iPod are on their second one, at least.
I care. Apple is marketing this device as a "do it all" device yet I'm limited to the amount of space the thing comes with? I wouldn't bring up the issue except the fact that it will be storing pictures, music, and video. That's huge, especially the video part.
Honestly what I was thinking when I saw this announcement was that I wished Nintendo was the company that announced the "iphone" not Apple because Nintendo actually thinks about consumer wallets first and THEN tries to meet as many expectations with as possible within those cost constraints (see Wii). With Apple you know why they didn't include a memory card slot: they want you to buy the next bigger version and full price. Had they offered a memory card slot you could easily get by on the lower end version with the intention of expanding the memory via additional memory cards.
Oh yeah, as of right now I have 4 different SD cards of different sizes and I own 3 devices (pda, camera, and wii) other than computers that use them. So while you don't care people like me find it as a bonus and convenience (picture viewing on the wii) if the device supports media other devices are capable of utilizing.
"Of 1,800 consumers surveyed, just 21 had spent more than $400 for a cell phone"
and Apple wants 1% of the cell phone market.
21/1800 = about 1%, doesn't it?
Sure that might mean they need to be the ONLY player in the smart phone market (or expand that market), but really, all the numbers are in the right ballpark - what the big deal?
---
I type this every time.
That's nothing, wait for the iPhone Shuffle! Just think, no screen at all, just tap the touch-sensitive case and it randomly selects someone in your address book to call...
Or possibly two random entries at once -- your GF and your mom/ex-/second-GF/etc.
Prolly no microphone, to get a smaller form factor. Just an earpiece.
Professional Wild-Eyed Visionary
If it's true, there could be a very good reason why the iPhone is not open to 3rd party development: it's mostly custom hardware with a very low end CPU. Steve Jobs said it himself, the iPhone consists of a lot of custom silicon to get all those features into such a small package.
:-)
Compare the iPhone with the Nokia 770 or 800 internet tablets (which are Linux devices): iPhone is smaller, has a lot more storage, seems just as powerful internet feature-wise, is ALSO a phone, and yet squeaks out MORE battery life. How is it possible? Custom silicon would do it.
So the iPhone may not even have a general purpose CPU! It probably does since it "runs OS X" -- probably only to co-ordinate the multitasking features. The iPhone could very well consist of a bunch of special-purpose ASICs. 3rd party development on this sort of platform makes less sense. Time will tell I guess.
Higher Logics: where programming meets science.
sure is deluded.
Yeah sure, an internal, non user-replacable battery didn't stop 70 million purchases. But it DID and continues to cause a LOT of frustration. Including myself. I am a potential purchaser of the iPhone, but I will not buy it on this annoyance alone.
Palm's with internal batteries don't cause people trouble? Strange, my Palm is now useless and every single long-term user of palm devices with internal batteries I know, has also got this problem. My Palm Tungsten E was useless after about 2 years.
I wanted this phone so that I could write apps for it in a gorgeous Apple UI phone. This is a stupid thing for Apple to do.
Locked to Cingular. I am a potential purchaser of the iPhone (in fact I have been waiting for YEARS for them to bring this out), but I will not buy it on this annoyance alone.
I *have* had visual voicemail for ***YEARS***. My vm's are emailed to me as audio files with descriptive subject lines to allow me an educated choice in what to listen to first.
PS, if you really think that a non user-replacable battery on a mobile phone is not a significant problem, I would have to seriously question your judgement. I've been using mobile phones for the past 16 years and with every single one I had to eventually replace the battery to keep the phone working. I am not going to buy a new damn phone just because of a dead battery.
...is truly astounding! That guy needs to see a shrink. Why is he so passionate about Steve Jobs success? Steve doesn't need his help. He can backdate his stock options and make enough money all by himself.
I buy Apple products when they're "right" (the iPod nano, the 30" monitor, the Mac Mini), but this is one I can live without.
Press Release - July 2007
Microsoft today announces the release of their groundbreaking and innovative ZunePhone. The device is to retail for $499 and incorporates a cell phone for exclusive use with MetroPCS, a DRM-crippled music player compatible with neither PlaysForSure nor the previous Zune Music Store, and a revolutionary mobile version of Internet Explorer promised to be even more secure and standards-compliant than Microsoft's much beloved IE6 web browser. The device is the approximate size and weight of a hardcover copy of War and Peace and includes a secure leatherette hand strap with stylish chrome buckle. The ZunePhone is available in three fashionable colors: Doodoo Brown, Bland Beige, and Yucky Yellow. Battery life is approximately 45 minutes, with display, touch screen, voice recognition, VibroAlert, and 5.1 Dolby THX surround sound speakers disabled.
Of 1,800 consumers surveyed, just 21 had spent more than $400 for a cell phone.
I bet they didn't ask us in Hong Kong. A $400US phone is nothing here. All my friends have phones in the $500+ range, and most are on their 6th one. People spend money in a different manner here. And I think mostly because most people don't have a car here and they needs to spend the cash somewhere else. Many people spend it on gadgets. Most don't even care about the specs. If it's new, buy it, if it looks cool, buy it. Most importantly, if it's expensive, raises your social status, and enlarges your penis, buy 2.
I am telling you $400 is average for a phone in Hong Kong. And I bet it's the same in the cell phone populated cities in greater China. Probably more so in Japan.
Why not call the 'iPhone' (Apple's) the IOUphone since its so expensive and tied to Cingular? Or the uPhone since the case against utube would be easier to win? Will the world economy grind to a halt when people stop grinding cell phone 'upgrades?' How about HIVE phones with no phone company involved at all ever, because they talk to each other by digital radio serially? (patent pending...patent trolling)
America has caught up with the rest of the world in mobile (cell) phone technology. Traditionally, it was Asia that always had the best networks, the best new features, the cheapest prices. Fortunately this has changed.
But Asia is still very much ahead of North America in another area: the business model used to sell phones. Years ago, phones were locked to network operators in Asia too. Phones could be bought as part of a 'subscription' to a provider, and providers tried (and failed) to 'lock in' consumers to their services, their pricing.
What an un-free thing to do. It's almost ironic to see the Land of the Free still lingering, allowing, perpetuating such un-free, un-ethical monopolizing business practises in this day and age.
I quote the Cingular President of National Distribution in PCMag.com ( http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2082062,00.as p ) which illustrates this mindset, and the depths to which Apple has fallen.
While "there are bad guys out there that unlock phones," Lurie said, Apple and Cingular are taking unspecified steps to make the phone more difficult to unlock and use on other GSM carriers in the US."BAD" people UNlock phones?? What a travesty of a statement that is.. It's the exact other way around: BAD people who HATE FREEDOM try to lock people into their (and their partner's) technology and services!
This is nothing short of the final Turn to the Dark Side for Apple. Locking people into everything.. Why are their business practises better than Microsoft again?
Chanchao
(From Thailand, without democracy in government, but WITH freedom in choosing your phones, apps and networks)
What all the detractors failed to address is the fact it's essentially a portable computer with a desktop OS.
...
So is the Pocket PC Phone Edition.
If there's other similar products on the market or on the way where are they?
At your nearest CompUSA, Frys, Best Buy,
The second generation Pocket PC (and about the 5th generation of Windows Powered mobile devices), Pocket PC 2002, was pretty good. It's a full fledged desktop OS with a tightly trimmed set of included libraries that are oriented towards a high end organiser. It's possible to write applications that will run on the Pocket PC *and* Windows, just by recompiling and linking them with the Windows version of the Pocket PC libraries. The development kit for Windows is free, and the calling conventions are the same... the only differences are the set of libraries available.
The phone edition of Pocket PC 2002 has been on the market for years.
And yet the Pocket PC didn't manage to nudge Palm out of the driving seat in the PDA market until Palm decided to split into two companies and the OS side ran off trying to get BeOS running on Palms. The Windows powered share of the market was consistently under 20% right up to the time Sony got tired of Palm's lack of direction and pulled the Clie out. In the phone market... well, what device is it that keeps coming up in this conversation? The Treo. There's been one or two mentions of the Pocket PC from people other than myself, but lots of people talking about the Treo.
Why?
Because the Pocket PC is "essentially a portable computer with a desktop OS", like the iPhone, and most versions have touch-screen input, like the iPhone.
This isn't like people comparing the iPod to the Rio. This is like Apple had come up with a Newton that played MP3s and put it up against the Rio.
why don't you super glue a Zune to a Blackberry
I'll keep carrying my Clie, an iPod Shuffle and a "free" cellphone, thanks. The Clie's 3 years old and still going strong, and I can take notes and look up addresses on it without having to juggle the phone between my ear and my hand, and I don't have to worry about battery life.
As someone who designs phones (softphones) for a living, I find iPhone to be a product that is more about the state of technology and general direction of user interfaces rather than anything innovative on apple's part.
If you look back at iPod too, the opportunity came for Apple in the form of three things:
Apple slickly packaged it. They are very good at doing that. But the point to remember is that they didn't (in spite of their claims) invent either the personal digital players(remember Rio), nor MP3 (actually napster did that) nor did they write the MP3 codec. More than anything else, they invented the jogwheel. Full marks for that.
Take a look at the main features of the iPhone now:
Soft-touch screen. Having a full soft screen is nothing new. My P800(from Sony Ericsson) had it a four years ago. In fact, you could detach the plastic keyboard overlay and turn it into a full screen phone. I guess the earlier models of Palm's phones were the same too. The point about Blackberry was that it gave people a full qwerty keyboard because users wanted it.
OS X. OS X has two components: A Unix-ish kernel and a Windowing GUI that uses WIMP (windows, icons, mouse, pointer). The kernel is not a bad choice. But the GUI that includes menubars, dockbars, overlapping windows, are a bad idea. Handheld applications are 'bursty' (you flip it on, take a few seconds doing something and flip it back). Desktop applications, on the other hand, are 'sessions based' (You spend can 15 minutes browsing a site).
Closed Phone. Haha!! what kind of a smartphone is it that doesn't even allow me to write a 'Hello World'? Mach kernel you said??
All in all, an important milestone in phone's User Interface evolution, all along the expected lines (like the 'pinch' gesture that we saw in Jakob Neilson's video made for Sun Microsystems). But nothing that broke new technology grounds (not even a 3G phone!).The purpose of all philosophers was to impress women
If (Apple needs to get 1% market share) and (1% of 1800 consumers surveyed is 18) and (21 out of 1800 surveyed consumers bought a cell phone greater than $400) then {
(Apple has a good chance of getting 1% market share)
}
Even if a small population of Apple's share holders and devout fanpersons bought one, they would easily sell 1 million of the things in the first two years. That might not corner the market, but it's sure gonna put a dent in it; more so than the ROKR ever did! Of course, these are all prognostications and only time will tell. I'm just glad my stock keeps going up!
But the churn rate for GSM phones is the same as CDMA phones, about 2.5yrs now. An older phone gets dirty, has bad batteries, decaying keyboard, and so on. The product life cycle is short, and getting shorter. Your carrier subsidized the cost of the phone-- and you paid it back in other charges-- either base-monthly-cost or toll charges.
A newer phone, better camera, (still 1G, not 3G) with bluetooth and GIS costs more. Maybe you'll like the new features and desire to buy them, or maybe not. Maybe you have too many cables and chargers-- I do. I have a $60 MP3 player, headphones, charger (1 home 1 car). I have 2 mobile phones-- one GSM world phone (quad band) and one CDMA phone (also with chargers, and so on). Then there's bluetooth earpiece. Then synchronization software. Charger for the MP3 player.
It makes life complicated. One device for multiple purposes is handy. People pay for handy. But Apple hasn't proven this phone, and it's only GSM, and it's only one carrier so far. Still, Motorola phones stink. Sony Ericsson phones have 'closed' features. Nokia are better, but break. LG and Samsung phones are pretty, but also break easily.
Will Apple succeed? It will be very difficult, but there is some temptation for device simplicity and consistency. Apple makes bad guesses sometimes, but lately, has been much better at making attractive devices that 'just work'. Is it worth the price? We'll see-- maybe, maybe not.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
There seems to be quite a few people complaining about the cost of the iPhone (Apple's not Cisco's but I digress...).
This little chart might help put things in perspective:
These are the current "Smartphone" type devices offered in the 77005 zip code by Cingular. These are the MSRP prices (not including rebates or other discounts):
Cingular 8525 $549.99
Palm Treo 750 $649.99
Cingular 8125 $499.99
Remember the Sony Ericsson P900? The original price was $899.99.
The Treo 600 debuted at $600.00 as well--and became endorsed as the "gadget of the year" by several publications.
These price points do not vary much from Apple's announced price points:
Apple iPhone 4GB $499
Apple iPhone 8GB $599
I wonder what all the fuss is about?
Since the device is also a full-fledged video iPod and mini-tablet-like internet appliance with WiFi, the price point is actually fairly competitive with the other premium "smartphone" devices on the market.
I'm not trying to be YAAFB (yet another Apple fan boy), but it seems like they're pretty serious about being competitive when comparing apples to apples (pun sort of intended).
Food for thought...
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
I am making a statement that does NOT in any way represent the opinion or policy of my employer, nor disclose any confidential policy information.
That being said, I sell Cingular for a living, and deal mainly with "high end" customers. In the past 48 hours, virtually every customer I've had has asked about the iPhone, whether they ultimately bought a Blackberry, a Windows phone (which sell in spite of my best efforts), or a "basic" phone. At $499 with contract, it will be the most expensive handset ever sold by Cingular in any significant volume, and expect the monthly service to be the same as a 3G PDA- probably about $50 a month on top of the voice plan. And you know what? It will sell like iPods and it will pay my bills. The two objections most people raise about premium phones are price and ease of use. The iPhone promises to solve one of those, and I would not be surprised if the exclusive agreement between Apple and Cingular solves the other. While the device price is very high, it would not surprise me if the data plan on it were discounted similar to a Blackberry. (Cingular "discounts" blackberry plans to $10 below comparable PDA plans, despite the service being much more useful and reliable.) How many people purchased the iPod Photo when it came out at the same price as the iPhone? How many parents have bought Sidekicks and Blackberries for the same teenage children they buy iPods for?
The strangest thing about the phones, in my experience, is that so far, the speculation has not seemed to slow down the rest of the smartphone market; in fact, if anything, it has had almost the opposite effect, and I can't make any sense of that. The new Windows GSM Treo has actually been selling (somewhat) despite being priced just $100 below the iPhone. The Blackberry Pearl is as popular as ever, with customers casually discussing the iPhone (and their plans to upgrade to it in a year or two) at the point of sale. Of course, the lack of 3G should hurt the iPhone, but the strange thing is, if you talk to the average prospective customer (the one in the store... not the one on slashdot) 3G just isn't compelling enough to matter. For every 3G device I sell, I deliver 10 to 15 Blackberries and GPRS phones. The technology just isn't deployed enough for people to care. Maybe once video calling hits people will start to care, but until then, watching TV and surfing the web on a 3.5" or smaller screen just doesn't justify a megabit downlink for most people.
Of the slashdotters here, though, who actually has a data phone already? Who is planning to buy an iPhone despite it's $500+ cost of entry and three figure monthly cost? (Raises hands both times) Worst part for me will be having to come up with the cash for two, because I think my sigificant other will bludgeon me with mine if I don't get her one.
Just my $.02...
Steve's statement in the keynote about why the keyboard was bad was that, specifically, if you upgrade software later on, a fixed keyboard can't adapt. Why would you need the interface to adapt if you didn't intend for the software to be flexible?
Not to mention Java. The first phone to be lacking Java loses. (err, except for that other big phone company.)
iPod games?
There are other features, like good voice recognition and text-to-speech, that can probably be done with the current hardware but require software development - I'm surprised they're not there, but if it wasn't ready in time for Macworld, it's an obvious thing to announce in June when the hardware's ready to ship. I'm more surprised that there aren't voice dictation features, since the hardware already supports voice compression (since the phone needs it) and there's plenty of RAM and a screen that would make UI easy to add - maybe the UI's too closely tied to other things that aren't ready yet?
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Yeah, I really didn't understand this.
Why did he go to the trouble of discussing how the iPhone "runs OSX," "has Cocoa" and "runs desktop-class applications" if it's going to be a closed platform?
It's completely nutters. Apple could choose to be in control of THE "must-have" POSIX handheld device with a software library encompassing all of OSX's existing software (minus the heavy hardware requirement stuff) and a significant fraction of the software available for FreeBSD and Linux... or they could choose to have a phone.
W. T. F?
+++ATH0
You are a genius! iHpone is gayest as ever anything from apple. Only faggots can like backwards interface and all buttons on windows. When I see "[Cancel] [OK]" I feel urge to punch some ugly apple dork into their retarded brains to fix the glitch.
I would by an iPhone tomorrow if I could, despite the lack of 3rd party support or the $500. But regardless, I'm not going to buy one because with their poor coverage in my area and the plan I currently have with my provider for the last 6+ years, I have absolutely no plans to switch to Cingular.
"To surrender to ignorance and call it God has always been premature, and it remains premature today." -Isaac Asimov
My gut reaction is that I really want this as a widescreen ipod that is also a webpad of sorts for email, skype, web, etc. Of course if I can't have skype or other similar voip, then not so much. If it works great as a phone too, so much the better. And the price doesn't bother me. Of course we're all techies here and this sort of toy sounds great if it becomes a little more open (or is hacked open) than the current reports. I'm not sure sure it will get the big cell phone share Steve wants. But then didn't everyone say Apple's mp3 player wouldn't do that well either... Probably a bit early to tell such things.
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/12/ 0430200
You're welcome.
Of course iPhone (especially when judged from a distance) is not going to be a perfect phone. There are many people around who would say that something this was and still is a perfect mobile phone (and to a great degree I can't blame them -- this phone does what a phone should do: makes calls). We can go back to 2001 and check the "predictive powers" of CmdrTaco wrt iPod -- has it panned out?
But is the market really *that* uncertain? Or maybe the analysts are looking at it from a way too US-centric view (and maybe Steve is making a very similar mistake not releasing this phone in US and Europe at the same time)?
Look at it this way, check out current Cingular offering. The cheapest smart phones start at $99 with a 2-year contrct, but these are older BBs 7290s and Treos. WinCE smart phones are between $299 and $399 with a contract (and at a special price). None of them carries nearly as much RAM as iPhone (and I read it that 4G or 8G will be the user available space), packs nearly the same set of features. I don't have a first-hand experience with WinCE phones, but I keep on hearing about dropped calls, reboots, etc. -- not good, and that;s already 2nd or 3rd generation, is it not?
Six months ago I picked up Nokia N80 for nearly $800. When I am looking at it now and comparing it to the iPhone -- I'll pay just about as much for iPhone now (and I bet it will cost just about as much in Europe): it has a much larger display, looks like it is so much faster, would seamlessly sync with my Mac.
But even if we set a nerd like me aside and just look in a different part of the globe, I know of a lot of people that here in Europe (and even more so, here in Russia) will shell out twice that for the iPhone had it been available here sooner. Look at the prices for the stylish high-end from Nokia (8800 and the likes) -- they are priced out side of any sensible ranges, considering what they can do (and don't even start me on Vertu -- a 3320 wrapped in jewels).
So, I think that while Steve may not end up meeting the 1% share target, he may still well make the required breakthrough, and by the 2nd generation of the iPhone it would make the same to smart phones market as 2nd gen iPod to the MP3 player one (or so I want to believe).
--AP
Yours is a perceptive comment. It is particularly interesting that the crux of the dispute is being regarded by Cisco as resulting from issues relating to the potential openness and interoperability of the "iPhone-like" devices.
./rs seem focused on price as an issue, the question of potential interoperability going forward will play a much larger role in future prices than the marketing and manufacturing costs of a particular device as how the network of such devices develop will largely dictate the direction of the market and hence relative value once more players move toward "consolidated-mobile-networked" devices. Presently, Apple, like its competitors, is trying to use the trade show to exaggerate the hype of their product, particularly among their market captives. However, the trademark dispute will acctenuate Apple's relatively weak position in this market as they own neither the trademark nor the bandwidth access they require to develop their essentially closed platform. Consequently, they will be limited in the short term by the Blackberry's and other similar devices already on the market and over the longer term by their need to adopt a closed strategy to maintain their captive market without seeing it diluted by interoperability issues that will loom larger and larger as the giants of the telecommunications industry move into this arena of convergence. Because they are largely held hostage to Cingular in the development of their market they will ultimately need to acquiesce to the Cingular service/support strategy imposed upon them. Cisco in contrast IS the center of the IP network world and given its size and strategic positioning will likely remain so for quite some time to come, hence their emphasis on "openness", "interoperability", and "emerging standards and functionality", as opposed to Apple's smaller, more narrow, closed approach.
It seems that the Apple iPhone is ironically being marketed not from a position of strength, but rather of internally perceived weakness. It would seem that being maintain a closed system both from an interoperability perspective, as well as a non-open platform for software developement to even including the non-replaceable batteries) is essential to the Apple strategy. They are afraid to develop an open device as it would bleed their captured installed base. Not owning the trademark, which will likely prove a PR nightmare for Apple. Cisco shrewedly perceives the PR and image struggle that will emerage from the trademark infringement and is couching its language as one of maintaing principle and protecting their "good name" and a failure by Apple to join them in "cooperation" for an open market.
Although
I think another issue that prompted them to "seize" Cisco's trademark is one of timing. LinkSys a division of Cisco beat them to market with an internet phone and with the arrival of the tradeshow they only had a narrow PR window to make their splash and the introduction of Cisco's iPhone last year caught them off guard. Given that its not "cool" to look like they are not "market leaders", Apple and perhaps Jobs's ego felt compelled to make an impulsive decision, not wanting to let Cisco do to Apple what Microsoft did to it many years ago). Thus, it is probable that the seizing of Cisco's trademark, had to come now, as this also provided a convenient means to turn attention away from the negative publicity associated with the stock options back-dating scandal. This is seen as critical to Apple's image, which has been badly tarnished by evidence released to date that shows Jobs was personally involved in suggesting favorable dates for backdating. It also reflects Apple's savy maniupulation of the media which turns any controversy into a major story as a means to facilitate PR (and advertising revenue).
Although Apple did an internal "investigation" and "cleared itself" of all wrong-doing, it is unlikely that this will stop ongoing official inquiries into the matter, which are likely to proceed in parallel with the t
Apple better hope so.
Toys R Us got its protection because others were attempting to use its R-Us Trademake logo with "look alike names". It already had the trademark. That was not in dispute.
Cisco's Linksys iPhone is directed as an element of its networked home initiative, which allows users to do VOIP and Skype-like VOIP service. It too is just being rolled out but already has sales in the 1,000's not hundred primarily to businesses where cost savings can be readily made on large scale purchases. These are likely to be rolled out in the near future to the Office Depot's and Walmarts of the world that are currently marketing LinkSys routers.
Keep in mind that Cisco's corporate policy is not to enter markets that they do not project they can become the #1 or #2 leading vendor within 3 to 4 years.
Your parents should have held on to their Cisco stock. It appreciated nearly 50% this year. With a current market-capitalization of about 174 billion dollars and now growing at nearly 20% per year it would appear that at least a few folks seem to know what they make.
I would never spend more than say 300$ on a device that mostly disrupts my life by making me reachable 24/7. However, of course with the iPhone it is different. Apple will have a tough ride but then again, it is an apple product. I can remember the gadget they launched back in 2001, when I did not believe that this would have a big market share. It was called the iPod. And as of today, the term mp3-player is almost synonymous with iPod. Maybe they do it again?
Black holes were created when god tried to divide by zero
Now its no secret that the USA is FAR behind most of the world when it comes to mobile phone usage. Thats why most of you are complaining about the cost of the gadget and also about being fixed to one provider. Apple should market and sell the gadget in Africa and yes at $499 - $599 a piece. Africans buy their own phone (no subsidised phones) and then buy the sim card from the desired provider. This is a system that I have now come to appreciate because I can jump ship everytime a price war gets underway.
Being an African and living in Africa again after being in europe for most of my high school and campus life, let me explain a few things about the mobile phone revolution that has taken place in africa. The BBC has covered a few points of what mobile phones have done in Kenya (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/help/3681938.stm) like providing services, economic growth and even democratic rights! Motorolla and Nokia have also noticed this and are heavily advertising in Africa. Nokia has a model search called Nokia Face of Africa (http://www.faceofafrica.co.za/). Motorollas Motorola RAZR V3 phone goes for $250...and some new Nokia phones go for as much as $800. So $499 for the iPhone is not really a bad deal...in Africa. I know I want one and so do most of my workmates.
the interface is pretty and all but it's too big. most people want the phone in iphone, primarily. everything else is a bonus. if it wants to compete with the rest of market it has to be of comparable size. i realise there are plenty of people who will buy one, because it certainly is a nice device, but if it wants to be sold as a phone it needs to become smaller.
no matter what they tell you, size does matter.
It's been so long since there was a good GNAA troll on slashdot. You had us all in suspense, wondering if the GNAA was ever to make a triumphant return. Pity it's still as lame as ever, but keep trying!
Worst. Acronym. Ever.
Remember this is not just a phone, but an iPod too; with a widescreen display. It fits somewhere inbetween the feature capability of the iPod Nano (storage space) and the full Video iPod (capability) with extra stuff involved.
As a successor to the iPod, considering the prices, it hits a fairly good niche. Do you need an MP3 player *and* a capable PDA-phone? Then why not have them both in one device? You may spend $300 on an iPod and $200 on a phone, now you can get them both in the same device. You also get a fairly reasonable digital camera, and it plays all your iTunes media probably a ton better than a real iPod did (nicer screen anyway).
I simply fear for fingerprints, and earprints (it turns the screen off when you hold it to your ear, but all that surface back and front..). Apple must have their shiny and glassy look. And there's no impetus on using a stylus, it's all multitouch and pinky fingers.. a lot of people will just get frustrated at how grimey it ends up looking during real use.
There's definitely a convergence market for it. MP3 phones these days usually suck as MP3 players. MP3 players as phones.. this is the first. It just so happens to be super-capable at both, without springing for a full PDA.
Cisco buy Apple? In its dreams, perhaps. I was an Apple fan boy since the '80s so I saw Apple at its worst in the '90s and even then there was a core of stockholders who simply had faith in the company. With Apple riding high and rising, there's no way that Cisco could muster the shares.
At worst, Cisco could buy Cingular and send checks to Apple for them to use their phone and then not use it. Oooh, that would have Steve Jobs quaking in his boots. He'd have to just keep his R&D boys going while the clock ran out on the Cingular exclusivity and then he'd enter the market with a gen3 iPhone (or whatever they'd call it) and offer it unlocked as well as bundled with a variety of carriers.
Boo hoo
Cisco would garner a ton of bad publicity and get, what? This scenario is highly unlikely but even if it does happen, Apple still comes out looking pretty good.
If you just had the interface and wifi along with a smart enough CPU, you'd have a really great wall terminal to put into every room. You could sell them to home builders in 10 packs and you'd end up with star trek (NG) wall communicators.
Sonera charge E2/month ($2.58) for service but you wont see them handing you a new phone each year.
_ pdf/0,2580,65423,00.pdf
http://www.sonera.fi/GetImages/GetImages_GetImage
That should give you some idea of the actual cost of providing cell service - and bear in mind that finland has half the population density of the entire USA.
Still, something like IMM implemented directly on the phone would be nice so you're not wasting screen real estate and/or having to bring up an app just to use your phone.
You know, the idea of a multitasking operating system on a personal computer was pretty radical in 1985, but it's more than 20 years later... surely the implications have sunk in?
OK, well, let's add another 1985 invention, layered screens on the Amiga... you know, like the Dashboard thing people thing Apple invented? Think that might help?
And you could, like, add an extra key on the keyboard to bring the phone interface up? Using something like a USB consumer control key... you know, those extra buttons you can't get a keyboard without these days... to bring it up?
Christ, maybe I ought to patent that idea.
Roughly Drafted? The same pro-mac Roughly Drafted that has been exploiting digg by modding up their own deluded articles via they and their readers' multiple accounts? Yeah, same one.
I will be one of the first beating a path to your door. Until then, I'll just send them all to the Apple
Store, where it will just work. iPhone was designed to do all those wonderful things without third party apps,
aftermarket add-ons, or knowing what any of those things are. Which is why Apple will sell a bazillion of them.
Mission: To provide products that consume time and energy as entertainingly as permitted by the laws of thermodynamics.
From TFA:
"This confirms what Dan posted earlier today about no user-installable apps."
"user-installable" != "third party". The obvious path Apple have most likely taken is that any third-party apps will be installable only via iTunes.