Slashdot Mirror
How Jobs Played Hardball In iPhone Birth
Carl Bialik from WSJ writes "Apple bucked the rules of the cellphone industry when creating the iPhone by wresting control away from normally powerful wireless carriers, the Wall Street Journal reports. From the article: 'Only three executives at the carrier, which is now the wireless unit of AT&T Inc., got to see the iPhone before it was announced. Cingular agreed to leave its brand off the body of the phone. Upsetting some Cingular insiders, it also abandoned its usual insistence that phone makers carry its software for Web surfing, ringtones and other services... Mr. Jobs once referred to telecom operators as "orifices" that other companies, including phone makers, must go through to reach consumers. While meeting with Cingular and other wireless operators he often reminded them of his view, dismissing them as commodities and telling them that they would never understand the Web and entertainment industry the way Apple did, a person familiar with the talks says.'"
Incorrect. The consumers are the orifices in the telco / phone maker / customer relationship. Everyone gets to screw them.
Anyway, let's hope the iPhone enjoys more success than the last Apple/Cingular deal mentioned in the article:
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
Remember than no iphones have been sold yet. The analysis needs to wait until some sales figures are available.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
I'm really for anything that helps wrestle proprietary control settings away from the major carriers.
Yup, you can expect Apple to fairly license proprietary control settings in a reasonable and non discriminate manner and help level the playing field in the cell phone market!
Thanks Apple for giving us more choice!
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
...if Apple meant it, the phones would be 100% unbranded and unlocked, they'd take any GSM provider's card, and APPLE would provide simple, regional, downloadable settings (for carrier-based web proxies, etc.)
Apple doesn't have to sell them through Cingular (AT&T) or anyone else.
Bucking the system...my shiny metal ass.
Obviously, we'll all have to wait until it's released to see what it's like. Apple are the masters of the UI, and most phones/smartphones I've had have really lousy UI. 3G or not 3G, I'd like to have a phone that doesn't suck to use. At this point, I'd toss out all the current crap and go back to my Nokia 6160 - it did what I needed and stayed out of the way. While I like getting email, Blackberry and Windows have a long way to go before they get away from sucking. I hope Apple's UI is a step forward. I could give a crap which 'G' my phone uses, so long as I like using my phone.
.if Apple meant it, the phones would be 100% unbranded and unlocked, they'd take any GSM provider's card....
And then Apple would not be able to provide features like visual voice mail which require changes to the carrier network.
What Apple gets by partnering is concessions in network development they would never get if they stood along against all other phone companies. That is the value that Apple brings to the table, making complex things easier and stuff like network improvements to handle random access voice mail are part and parcel of that. If the iPhone were just like any other MVNO phone, it would lose a lot of potential for true innovation in phone development.
What will be really interesting to see is how the open Linux phones proceed, or if they run into roadblocks.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
That's just Apple FUD. I have never had an app bring down any of my Java MIDP handsets (NEC e606, NEC e616, Sony Ericsson Z800i, Nokia 6280). The systems are designed very carefully to avoid the possibility of apps bringing down the RF stack or screwing with basic phone functionality. Maybe the iPhone OS is just poorly designed and it's easy for bad apps to bring down the phone.
And now the countdown starts on the two other phones cited in the WSJ article. It didn't fly under my radar the "boy have we patented it" line at the expo - and for those who want the recast, on the (free) download at iTunes of the keynote - at 1:30 (remaining) comes the clarifier of over 200 patents filed on the iPhone.
Looking at the slightest cause for a lawsuit - "trade dress" it seems the other manufacturers are playing with fire already.
For a fan of corporate porn (me), it's going to be fun watching the legal fallout from the clones (remember all the imac clones that emachine tried to sell within a year - that's absolutely nothing compared to the design theft that happens in cellphones all the time). The LG and the Samsung weren't mentioned to have touch-screen but - boy - the LG is really looking to open it's legal doors in "creating consumer confusion from trade dress" bigtime.
Anyone want to place bets on when the first lawsuits from Apple start? I'm guessing August by the latest.
You are 100% on target. The major carriers in the USA have gotten so incredibly bad it boggles the mind. I am now in Australia, and what a difference. Real competition! You can take your phone *with* you. Its a huge difference. Oh, and the phones tend to be better. Man, the FCC really needs to require unlocking of phones.
Cemil.
I'm sure a locked down phone that only runs Apple's software and is only available on Cingular, with Apple claiming that it's morally wrong to unlock a phone (such people are "bad guys") to run on other networks, is going to do that.
Anyone who thinks Apple is trying to do anything but shift power from one proprietary group to another is delusional.
Worse still, Cingular is one of the only two major GSM/UMTS carriers in the US. So it was one of the few that was truly open and non-proprietary, compared to the likes of Verizon.
I'm hoping some of Apple's innovations in the UI realm will make their way to competing phones, but right now the Apple phone itself is bad news from the point of view of opening up the industry. It represents everything that's bad about the US mobile phone industry, it's expensive, locked down, and treated by its maker as little more than a weapon to play in some insane power wars in which the end user will always be the victim.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
How about from the point of view of "using a phone"? Is it bad news from that point of view?
I have to confess that I'm really only concerned with that point of view and don't really care all that much about whether the mobile phone industry is "opened up" in some fashion or another. As long as the service provided is acceptable (it is) at a price I feel is not out of line (it isn't) then that about covers it for me.
From the very beginning all I wanted was a phone. I didn't care what games you could play on it or whether or not it could browse the internet or send text messages. I didn't give a shit if it had a calculator or a for that matter if it even saved numbers. I can remember numbers and I'm loath to give up the responsibility of doing so. I know so many otherwise intelligent people who can't remember more than one or two phone numbers now that they have an almost limitless address book in the palm of their hands. They save every number that comes their way but don't know any of them. I don't want to be one of those guys. For years I've bought a simple plan, used a free phone, and that was fine for me. Now Apple has made this really cool phone and for the first time I'm actually considering paying a butt-load of money to buy something much farther up the phone "food chain".
And I'll be damned if all I really care about is whether or not it works as advertised. I don't give a shit if it runs Linux or can be unlocked to run on any network I might imagine running it on. I don't care. I just want it to work. It's a fucking phone not some flag to rally around or a battlefield to fight for our rights on. It's not a "weapon in some insane power war" either. It's just a phone.
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
Regardless if the product is a stinker it will sell well, because its Apple.
The Cube?
Case closed, on your argument.
People buy Apple products when they work well. Over the past few years Apple has done a good job at producing products that work well for people. It's amazng how sales follow when you build something that works.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I'm an Aussie and haven't got a clue about US telco's, I recall that Telstra was tipped to be the distributor for the iPhone in Oz but has recently told Apple to "stick to knitting" because their phone is "only 2.5G not 3G"? IIRC, Cingular is the parent company of Telstra's biggest competitor.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
You mean like the ROKR? Apple fans are always quick to disavow that one as though Apple had never touched it.
Oh, Apple touched it - and found out what happens when you let tradition cell-phone design take place. Not even Apple can come up with a usable device through the process. This of course dispells the notion that people buy things just because APple is involved with them - people buy Apple devices when the work well, not when they suck.
Notice they were able to learn from thier mistake, which is what the article is really about.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Apple shouldn't have to license FairPlay any more than Microsoft should have to license the Win32 API to Apple so I can run my DirectX games on any computer.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Another hint: most people know how to connect their phone to their PC. It's called mini USB. Know how I know they know how to do this? It's the same method as an iPod.
Yes, and how do you transfer files to it? Either you drag files manually into weirdly laid-out folders, or you have to use some kind of flaky, slow, ugly application the manufacturer had some moron throw together, with bitmapped graphics all over the place.
This space intentionally left blank.
Let me say this again - it doesn't matter that your phones could technically do everything the iPhone can. The point is that the iPhone will make it simple, straightforward and easy.
It's like you're saying that all cars are the same because they can all get you to your destination, will keep you hot or cold, and will let you play the radio. Never mind how fast they accelerate, what the fuel mileage is, how well the AC works, how good the speaker system is, how reliable it is. A Kia Rio and a BMW 335i _technically_ have many of the same features - why would anyone buy the BMW?
This space intentionally left blank.
Me too. I have a Nokia N73 - it has an excellent web browser, first time I have seen that. It also has a large and pretty screen. However, in all other regards, this phone has the same usability as the 4 or 5 year old 6600 I had before. Progress? We've heard of it. There's a long delay for bringing up most functions, Symbian/60 interface is clunky to say the least.
I paid over $500 for this phone and it's a huge disappointment as a smart phone. As soon as I can get my hands on an iPhone it's a goner.
The positive aspect is that it will hopefully wake Nokia et al from their slumber and do some real user interface research. Make it work, and make it fast. The basic Nokias of old were excellent in terms of user interface - much simpler of course. But symbian is a usability disaster. And may in fact be the reason Apple is doing the iPhone in the first place. Windows Mobile is equally bad but then no one expected any different.
Forgive me for trotting out Apple's own tired line on this subject: Licencing DRM means there will be more chances for the details of the DRM to be leaked, and thus the system will be compromised. The best way of handling DRM is to not use it at all. This will ensure 100% interoperability and allow for true competition in the marketplace.
Microsoft "licenced" their DRM system to their friends and colleagues in a system called "Plays For Sure". You might have heard of that mess when reading up about the abominable Zune media player.
DRM isn't just bad for consumers, it's bad for hardware manufacturers, content providers and anyone attempting to run a media store.
Apple does give you choice: you can choose to (a) buy the song from the iTunes Music Store and only play it on iTunes or an iPod, or (b) buy the song from a bricks-and-mortar store (ie: as a CD) and play it where you want. If the device that Apple sells you doesn't do what you'd like, complain to Apple or buy another device (or hack your iPod to give you the features you want).
Or you're a Verizon customer, you pay them 25 cents to put it on a web page, which you then screenscrape.
DRM isn't just bad for consumers,
WTF? DRM is awful for consumers. It takes away your fair use, it takes away unfair uses, it generally makes life bloody inconvenient to format shift, etc.
DRM is dreadful for consumers, bad for content owners, but a boon for hardware manufacturers. (Sorry, the DRM on your music player isn't compatable with the cheapest music store, go and buy another player).
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
Ever heard of Fitt's Law? There's a very good reason for putting the menu bar at the top of the screen - it makes it much easier to 'hit' the menus with your mouse, because the mouse stops at the top of the screen. Compare this to windows, where you have to hit a target of about 20 pixels or so to select a menu. I suppose it might not be completely intuitive, but in the long term it is a much better solution. ...
That's why Vista's UI is so great, right? I've seen it on several machines now, and it's a freaking mess.
So if hitting the menu on an appliation is too hard and you need the edge of the screen to find it, then maybe you should try Vista, it is virtually menu free, a paradigm even easier than the dated menu concepts still in use on OSX. Or even really blow your mind, try Office 2007, again no menu and a nice large ribbon to find (that can auto-hide if it gets in your way). (And being Menu-free or using a Ribbon are neither MS nor Apple innovations.)
I can't believe you actually had the guts to defend the Apple menu bar that is carried over from 'UI Innovations' of 1983 in an argument about how Apple's UI is always better and 'more' innovative. Either it is guts or you just don't get it.
Did you completely miss my point? I realize that these things are all technically possible on Windows Mobile and Motorola devices - the point is that the interfaces are lousy. I guess it's a matter of opinion - but I know a lot of people share mine
I actually didn't. There are lot of people that actually do like the UIs on some of these devices and is also a reason for their success, even the Motoral Razr has nice easy interface with voice activated dialing that is a great selling point for users.
So Windows Mobile 6.0 is a lousy interface? That is YOUR opinion, and considering it hasn't even been released, I kind of doubt you have used it.
Even PalmOS has some 'innovative' ideas that made it a success and a success on Phones years ago.
Oh, and there is the fact people can develop applications for not only the dated PalmOS, but Windows Mobile and even JAVA or Brew applications for MOST phones, again something the iPhone won't be able to do.
Considering I have been using 3G and other high speed cellular techology from my phone for OVER 3 years now, it is frankly SCARY that Apple thinks its users will want to try to browse the web, download songs or do anything on their phone at barely better than dial up speeds.
So when you are using your shiny iPhone, and notice the guy in the corner of Starbucks watching TV or streaming a movie on their cellphone, don't be jealous. Just remind yourself that Apple is so innovative, they know better than the other companies and you can remind yourself you didn't want TV or Movies because Apple told you so.
So, that's the best Microsoft UI innovation you could think of?
Ya, that is only one I could think of, what a great counter-argument.
Oh wait there is also the concept of select and modify, so next time you highlight some text and then change the Font/Color/Size/etc, think of MS, again they did it first.
Do you think it is just possible that I might be using rather simplistic examples of 'innovative' concepts in UI usage that is littered THROUGHOUT any modern GUI based OS?
Geesh...
There's a sligtht difference in the products though.
PS3: Thinly veiled attempt to shove BluRay down the masses' throat. Would be $300 cheaper otherwise.
iPhone: Phone people actually want to use. First innovative phone since the color screen. Same price as other smart phones.
RIM, with their Blackberries, were really the first ones to not allow carriers to screw up their firmware. It's really quite trivial as a normal user to do pretty much whatever you want with a Blackberry (provided you have a data plan).
"property rights" ARE "government interference and regulation". Property rights are granted by the government to encourage and reward innovation. I don't consider "you can't use this without paying me $$$" to be innovation.
The modern PC is a great example of how innovation is helped by open specs, but open specs help the market and thus society, not the creator. Perhaps the government should lighten up on their "interference and regulations" and we could see some real improvements in consumer tech.
You don't have to license the Win32 API, because reverse-engineering for the purpose of interoperability is protected by the DMCA. You do have to license FairPlay, because a competing implementation would not only almost certainly run afoul of Apple patents, and because it would be an unlicensed copy protection circumvention device, and thus illegal under the same body of law.
You are welcome to attempt making another analogy.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Rights are not granted by any government. They are retained by THE PEOPLE and recognized by the government. This is a very important distinction which you absolutely must understand before entering into any discussion of property rights.
Open specs do help the market, but that doesn't mean businesses should be forced to open the specs of their software. If consumers are willing to buy what's available, then open specs don't even matter.
Errrrr right. You do understand that other vendor's can't implement fairplay don't you?
So? It's an artificial barrier to something that should be easy. IE. If you buy music from one source, you should be able to play it everywhere.
That should be easy what?
I realise that English is not your native language, so you have a little difficulty following sometimes.
By "A technological barrier to something that should be easy," I was saying that Apple has an artificial barrier to something that should be easy to do. Ohh, you mean like playing CDs on a tape deck - that kind of easy.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck