Slashdot Mirror
The Perfect Phone Storm?
peter deacon writes "Is the iPhone the next Segway, the next Zune, or the next iPod? The Perfect Storm offers some iPhone details that aren't secrets, but tend to be lost upon the analysts and journalists cranking out hit pieces on the iPhone. Why is everyone from Gartner to Gizmodo calling for a boycott of the iPhone? An interesting take on how Apple's new mobile phone will push to open up the web as a mobile platform for every mobile device on the market with a standards-based browser, and how Apple 'hacked the hackers' by releasing Safari for Windows in advance of its new phone."
Worked for me...
Good article, shows up quite a bit of bias on the part of certain 'reviewers'... But if you actually believed they were impartial in the first place, I've got a great bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
This is a sig. It is like every other sig in the world, except that it is mine, and it is different.
AT&T really has the power to make or break the iPhone. If the network doesn't support fast enough connections to enable fast safari apps the device is sunk. But I like the articles brief coverage of the other non-issues that the iPhone haters are using.
I think we should have a cap for shameless slashverts per week per product..
Apple has dropped just enough information at just regular enough intervals to create a level of anticipation for the iPhone that can only be described as off the hook. Amid all the opinions--and the frantic warnings of doom from certain analyst groups--are a few details that have been largely overlooked.
Here's a deconstruction of a few myths that have failed to take these unhidden secrets into consideration, along with the final aspect of why Apple released Safari for Windows, as I promised to reveal in the last article. It has something to do with the iPhone, of course.
Segway Segue, or AirPort Runway?
The levels of both enthusiastic hype and detractors' hate over the iPhone appear to have handily eclipsed one of the last ultra-hyped new devices of the tech world: Dean Kamen's Segway personal transporter.
Back in 2001, the Segway was presented sight unseen as the mysterious, revolutionary invention Ginger. It was privately shown to a handful of luminaries--including Steve Jobs--who all seemed excited about its potential. When actually revealed to the public, it was met with a mix of interest and ridicule, in part due to its steep price tag. After all, if you can't afford it, it must be silly and impractical.
Kamen's claim that the Segway would change society and that cities would be reconfigured to account for a world mobilized by two wheeled robot transporters didn't work out as planned.
San Francisco--one of the few cities to have enough flush nerds to warrant opening up a Segway dealership--actually banned the device on its sidewalks in a frantic, spastic panic about public safety concerns.
On the other hand, there have also been runaway hits that initially received little hype, criticism, or attention. Apple's AirPort introduced a mainstream audience to WiFi wireless networking. Apple wasn't the first implementation on Earth, but it did offer a pioneering set of products that delivered ease of use on a level that is still unmatched.
The iPod was also greeted with passive yawns and dismissed as too simple, too expensive, and uninteresting by critics, only to build into a phenomenon that changed the music industry, made Apple's simple music players a household name, and established the company as a top consumer brand.
The Devil in the Details.
Unlike the Segway, the iPhone isn't a hyped tease. Apple introduced the device six months ago with a full demonstration of how it actually worked, assigned it a firm price tag, published its technical specifics down to the millimeter and gram, and provided a comprehensive look at its features and underlying technologies.
In comparison, Microsoft's Zune--which had been in the news just a few months earlier--was presented from the start as having an unclear feature set. Fans made broad assumptions about its capabilities, resulting in great disappointment. Analysts overreached to claim that Microsoft would eat up Apple's iPod market share by offering a highly subsidized unit, or even offer it for free with a subscription plan, neither of which actually happened.
As the "iPod Killer" got closer to release, its price was still a secret and its key features were revealed to be more limited that anyone imagined. Its highly touted WiFi became nothing more than a way to squirt advertisements to friends, exploiting "the Social" in an attempt to sell music in Microsoft's new PlaysForSure-incompatible version of its impossible to crack Janus DRM.
Only its violent failure could silence the giddy critics that gushed about its supposed game changing, iPod killing impact that never happened. The Zune made the Segway look like a runaway hit.
The Desperate Panic of the Apple Haters.
It is therefore interesting to compare the news sources that gushed over the Zune--with little information from Microsoft--and encouraged their readers to blow $250 on one, because they are today providing a non-stop emergency warning siren that ignores everything we've been told by Apple about the iPhone to instead present a
Bad Panda! No Bamboo for you! In matters of importance ACs will not be responded to. Want to say something critical,OK
Site seems down, but if it's from Roughlydrafted, I don't even need to read it. I'm guessing it's about how misreported/misunderstood/misrepresented Apple is by this and that media outlet and how some Microsoft conspiracy or Apple detractors were trying to put them down, but Apple's brilliant strategy will allow them to prevail nonetheless. Probably intermixed with lots of photoshopped illustrations and "witty" sub-headlines.
Yeah, I know, ad hominems are bad, but every Roughlydrafted article is like that. That guy is probably minting AdSense-gold from people who get too worked up about Apple (both pro and contra).
Your complaint has been registered and is currently scheduled for several "overrated" downmods from our crack team of Applephile moderators.
Please stand by.
Segway? Zune? ... Zune? Segway?
Zuneway!
Three Squirrels
Jesus Christ, why are you still giving this shill a platform? I mean, I know flamewars create ad impressions, but come on. This isn't global warming or terrorism. This is people treating a corporation like a religion! You're better than this, slashdot!
He was caught gaming Digg, you know.
Nothing new. As I've said before - if Slashdot absolutely must link to roughly drafted rants which always use the same tactics to twist the reality into something else than it is - can we pretty please with sugar on top have an own category for them? I'm interested in iPhone and Apple products in general but this stuff...yuck.
I wasn't convinced about the iPhone until I watched it. While the data rate will be slow, the whole operation of the phone is very simple and highly usable.
While the product may or may not succeed, you will see much of it's functionality stolen by Microsoft and the Symbian crew.
The iPhone interface makes UIQ, S60 and Windows mobile seem like dumbphones.
>"Slashdot has just posted yet another clearly biased article about how great the ipod is going to be"
;-)
We all know how great the iPod is. This is about the iPhone. You may want to re-read the article.
can it just come out already?! Apple has all but abandoned it's desktops(there hasn't been a significant refresh in over 9 months of any of the desktop lines) but pimps this stupid $500/600 phone like there is no tomorrow. I'm just hoping that once this damn thing is released Apple will remember that it makes computers too.
Monstar L
I thought getting an iPhone might be interesting, but to be honest the barrage of media coverage has been *so* excessive I'm already sick of the damn thing and it hasn't even been released!
So, the answer would be no. Besides it's only pretend geek phone - a real geek phone would fit in a CF socket so you could drop it into any device you like, and come with an unlimited high speed data plan as standard.
Beep beep.
That was quick.
There are a lot of Apple haters, mostly with their fortunes tied to its failure. That's not going so well. TFA is just a response to the avalanche of bought-and-paid Microsoft FUD reporters who can't seem to get the term "unbiased" right. Call for an iPhone boycott? You can always hope - suckers. This article is biased toward outing those buffoons with nothing else to do except panic. I cringe at some the venom this guy has published, but as uppity and fanboyish as Dan is, he's mostly right.
Most of the stuff on
As much as Apple would like to believe the interface can swing it, it appears the only way to code for it right now is to write browser apps (please someone tell me I'm wrong here, I'd love to be). So your apps need to be connected. And costing you money. And limited by the need to be in the browser, so no local caching of information like google maps or live maps for mobile does. No manipulation of files store on the phone. No games outside the browser.
Nokia has the symbian sdks and java, microsoft has the .net compact framework (and in the HTC phones java as well). Apple are restricting everything to the browser (and if we're lucky, they may support flash in the browser).
So why would Symbian or Microsoft steal a restrictive programming framework? The interface may be nice, and it will sell it to end users, but it's not a phone for developers or even corporate users.
Blogs "articles" such as this one make me cringe. Talk about fanboys taking their obsession far to serious. I mean, a Gartner report is the last thing that's going to stop the iPhone from being a massive success. Furthermore, so what if Engadget and Gizmondo have slightly negative writing on the iPhone, that's just 2 out of 3.1415 googol blogs and sites which are giving the phone great marketing for free.
Some have already said this - but the bias level of this article is higher than an out of whack PID controller.
You are being melodramatic. And you clearly didn't take the time to read the piece. I did.
There are moments in the article where he intelligently breaks down aspects of the hatred being tossed around, possibly in conflict of interest scenarios. It seems much of the article points out that the iPhone gravitates heavily toward open standards, which I find to be a very good thing.
By the way, the article is not about AT&T. It's about the Apple iPhone. Thanks for registering your complaint, but please troll elsewhere.
The bad news for Apple is that I sincerely doubt it'll be able to live up to the hype. Even if it's a decent device; even if it's best of its class, it can't live up to the absurd hype, and no matter how good it actually is, it'll be a disappointment.
If it does by some miracle live up to the hype, that hype would be all the more potent if it came after the device came out and people just couldn't stop talking about them at that time. As it is, there won't be that much new about it to talk about, and it'll lose some of its buzzworthiness to people already being sick of hearing about it.
Slay a dragon... over lunch!
but this article doesn't add anything
I found it useful in several places. Recently my father forwarded me an email from his boss (IT email/blackberry support) saying they were taking a wait-and-see approach on the iPhone, and refusing support for the moment. The reasons for doing so were basically a copy and paste of Gartner's assessment--including the fact that there was no Notes/Exchange support.
I'm not in IT (anymore) so I didn't know that Notes/Exchange support IMAP and POP, so the claim of no Notes/Exchange support is a bit of a red herring. At the very least, Gartner should be embarrassed for being professionals in the field and forgetting about that.
the shady past of AT&T is nothing but a weak smear campaign dragging up every tiny thing from the past
See, I didn't get that. I don't feel the article said it was a weak smear campaign--I felt the article gave the shady past of AT&T its due. For me, the most salient point was the fact that Gizmodo didn't hold other companies to the fire like they have AT&T. If that's true, I think they have a point to a point--AT&T's dealings are so much more shadier than other companies.
iPhone is an extension of the iPod and media business, not the computer business. It's driving feature is that it's an iPod... most business won't sign up for that, Period. Apple is trying to get the Web, music and video features to the PEOPLE, not companies (because they won't use it anyway) The goal of 90% of cell phone at this point is to get companies to buy dozens and lock them their networks. IF you don't have a business network for your smart phone, adding applications, or connecting to email is just a pretty feature, because unless you work for a company that pays, you don't ever get half the features that makes the phones so great.
Apple wants People to have phones.. it's a market 10x bigger than what Windows mobile or Palm have made for themselves with a 5 year head start. Ask yourself, with a 5 year head start, why are "smartphones" still only "Geek" toys? Why aren't they good enough for everybody? Apple is trying to get it's 10% of the market by bringing NEW users into smartphones!! not simply making a phone for the droves of industry pundits and IT managers looking for a new toy. I think a lot of the bad reviews are because Apple is not catering to what the pundits say they should be doing, not passing out previews like candy, not caving to pressure to add every special interest feature under the sun and being ignored makes the big players really upset because their whole business is being "in the loop" and Apple is cutting them out with a vengeance.
Is it like walmart, in which every mom and pop shop is going to have close, adn the big guys, like target, are going to have find innovative ways to compete?
Is it like SUVs, in which individuals are unfairly taking advantages that were meant to for farmers and laborers, thus forcing those that choose not to take advantage of the tax code to subsidize their lifestyle?
Is it like the american automaker, refusing to put put profits into R&D, seeing it's stock turn to junk.
Or is it as simple as the wackos on street corners who scream at people as the walk or drive past, imploring them not to visit a particular place because they will be putting their immortal souls in jeopardy.
I may not get an iPhone, but given the amount of money that has been spent begging people not to buy it, I look forward to how it will transform the US mobil phone market as well as the Blackberry/MS fight over the enterprise mobile market. Given the level of fear, I expect that transformation to be significant. I see IT personal having to go to training, kickbacks disappearing, and perhaps, in a perfect world, more webpages that can be read by browsers other than IE.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
It is no wonder that there is a lot of curiosity and anticipation of this device. To spite what geeks/nerds might think, the current products on the market today are a mess. Look at these things with dozens of buttons, thick and ugly, with thrown together interfaces, everything is basically a one-off kludge. Consumers see the potential in handheld devices but they know that nobody has yet realized this potential. Will it be the iPhone? I don't know. But if it isn't, we might be in trouble- I don't know of another device on the horizon with as much potential.
Ask yourself, with a 5 year head start, why are "smartphones" still only "Geek" toys? Why aren't they good enough for everybody? Apple is trying to get it's 10% of the market by bringing NEW users into smartphones!!
The biggest problem with smartphones and the iPhone is size. If you aren't carrying a bag or wearing cargo pants, they just don't fit. Going out dancing or bar hopping with a Treo clipped to your hip just looks stupid. If they really want to revolutionize phones, every iPhone needs to come with an iPhone-nano that rings at the same phone number.
We are all just people.
The Article compliments of nyud.net
I don't know why everyone's getting so hyped up over a small part of the iPhone. I know I want one because a) it syncs with iCal and addressbook and b) it has good chances to being the first ever actually useable smartphone. I've looked all over the market about a year ago, and to be honest, every smartphone sucks, just each one in different ways. From what I've seen, the iPhone has the lowest "suck factor" by far, and a couple really nice features. I don't think the web-browsing will clock in a considerable part of the time you spend with your phone for most people.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Columnists don't necessarly bash products becasue they hate the product. They're in a ratings business. If everyone writes articles that praises a product, we'll all yawn and nobody will bother to read them. By bashing a product -- especially if it's a product that everyone else loves, this creates controversey.
.99 per song the iTunes Music Store, that maybe Apple's exclusive deal with AT&T came with a clause that also limits what AT&T can charge for the rate plans on the phone in order to keep that exclusivity. I expect to have my sanity challenged for even being willing to consider such a possibility, but remember that since AT&T stands between Apple and Apple's customers. They can totally make or break the success of this product. Apple has a lot at stake and is generally not stupid when it comes to negotiations, so I'm hopeful that their agreement with AT&T keeps AT&T in check or gives Apple the right to sell the product through other carriers if AT&T can't perform.
We see this on slashdot all the time... we call it 'trolling'.
As for the iPhone we'll have to wait and see. While I can find things to criticize in Apple's products (as the saying goes.... you can't please all of the people all of the time) they do have a reputation for good products.
Did anybody *really* have high hopes about the Microsoft Zune? Maybe fan-boys did, but most people in the industry have come to expect that getting software from Microsoft is almost like getting software from the former KGB (it's loaded with 'bugs' and they maintain more control over your device than you do -- why should the Zune be any different.)
The high expectation about the iPhone is because so far most phones suck. It would be really nice to have a phone that sucks less than the one I have now. That phone is a Treo 650 that used to crash 3 times per day. Now it only screws up a few time per week and for some strange reason I am happy with this because I fear that every *other* phone will be just as bad and I'll just end up locked into another contract.
Speaking of contracts... AT&T (Cingular) says they plan to reelase "new phone plans" on June 29th which go with the iPhone. Having a very low opinion of phone companies, my assumption is that this will be a plan intended to rape buyers, but make up for the high price tag by offering poor service. (Please God tell me it isn't so) My hope is that since Apple was successfully able to keep the music industry from charging more than
But seriously, what I really feel will limit iPhone's adoption, at least on this side of the pond, is the non-serviceable battery. What's up with that? That's borderline demented! All the mobiles I've had since 1995 had interchangeable batteries! And batteries these days are notoriously piss poor, they only endure a few hundred charge/discharge cycles, after 6 months or so they start holding maybe 70 or 60% of their initial charge, after a year or less they're good to be replaced. At least with my Nokias I can just ride down to the store, buy a new battery and plug it in. Voilà, it's as good as new.
I wouldn't buy an iPhone because of that reason alone. I have two or three batteries for all my phones, and usually carry a second freshly charged one with me, because I'm not always sure I can go home everyday, or will be able to find a place to charge the phone.
I go through a new mobile maybe every two or three years, but I buy new batteries yearly or less. My phone is very important to me, I just checked and my five and a half year old Nokia 6310i has a little over 715 hours of talk time; my three year old Nokia 6230 has a bit over 482 hours; and the new Nokia 6233 I bought in December to retire the 6310 already ranks over 230 hours. Even with the 40% increase in battery time (what, it'll last 45 minutes now?), the fact I can't change the battery is still makes it a toy. Thanks, but no thanks.
Well, that, and the piss poor data rates are also laughable. What is this, 2002 all over again?
And besides, what idiot had the brilliant idea of leaving out 3G in a handset marketed towards hip, young, urban people? That's the key demographic target of 3G! Leaving it out is an egregious mistake if I ever saw one.
Cingular almost always sim-locks their phones. My treo 650 was sim locked when I bought. Then I called them up last year and told them I was taking a business trip to Ireland and needed the unlock code. The emailed it to me no questions asked.
Who let this tripe get to the front page? Everyone should know that RD articles deserve to be marked down right in the Firehose. He profits directly from this exposure. Seriously, what did this article tell us? Oh, right, it told us nothing. It is useless conjecture and more silly defense of a company. The absolute best part is the author has the gall to label some bloggers as "impassioned." Hate to break it to you buddy, but who is the one Photoshopping heads of Microsoft onto movie posters? Or writing at least ten articles about a freakin MP3 player from Microsoft Or running a whole website devoted to spreading the 'truth' in this age of 'Microsoft-loving media'?
But, like everything unintentionally funny, it gets even better. He argues, and I quote, "Apple hacks the hackers." (How clever, did he think of that himself?) He issues a hand-waving argument about how the bugs weren't really in Safari (just in the shared libraries, which, *technically* isn't in Safari.exe. Yeah, let's try that argument for IE, shall we?). But, he then claims that by having the hackers find these bugs, they got free QA. I bet all those hackers are sitting around now and thinking, "BLAST! Our plans have been thoroughly foiled by Apple once again! We have been unfairly tricked! I call foul play!"
It looks like I need to up the ante when it comes to making jokes about RD. And I encourage you to do the same.
The iPhone costs as much as PS3, but that won't phase the rabid early adopters. And as cool as the iPhone is, I just don't see the value when I can buy a low end laptop for the same price.
Just as the original iPod was outlandishly over-priced for my tastes, so too is the iPhone. Give it a few years and the price will drop and the design and UI will be perfected, just like the iPod.
Who cares about balance, I want truth. I don't want people either yelling about how 2+2=5, or that 2+2 equels either or both 5 and 4. I just want people paid to deliver the truth to actually care more about it than their bias, and to change their opinions based on what their investigation turns up. It's hard, sure, but if it's what their day job they should be able to muster that extra effort.
What it did do was expose hundreds of thousands of people to Safari (there have been over 1M downloads), helping people to accept that Safari is a real browser and ready them for iphone.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Xserve is used quite a lot where easily expandable computing power is required such as video studios.
Apple aims at the home market, and a small section of the professional market, namely those who do what Apple kit is good at (Design, artistic, video, audio production etc). That said, I've also seen Mac Pros and Xserve together with Xserve RAID and Xsan to do high-level research work.
Apple hasn't yet (afaik) aimed at a business which needs 2500 new terminals just to do spreadsheets and word processing. They may in the future, but for now Apple kit just isn't right for enterprise level business. It is good, however, for large production type businesses. Wander around a newspaper editing room and see what people use.
How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
"The iPhone is nothing special."
Really? I watched the original demo back in January, and after that I knew how to use it. I'd never held one in my hand, but if you gave me an iPhone I bet I could get all the stuff to work in a couple of minutes without using a manual.
Contrast that with my Samsung WinMobile smartphone. The manual for that is about half an inch thick (I still can't remember how to do some of the things on it). The software that is bundled has inconsistent interfaces. Nothing seems to work in a predictable way on it and the touchscreen is tiny, requires a crap stylus, has buttons all over it, and looks like ass. And, although it was a free gift from my employer, it costs more than the iPhone.
The iPhone is the original Macintosh of smartphones. The only difference is that you don't have to keep swapping disks out of it, but most people would think that a good thing.
The iPhone is going to be a massive success because a lot of people would like the functionality of a smartphone, but have been put off by the poor usability of previous efforts.
"by that I mean people who don't sit on slashdot all day wondering why everyone else isn't building robots" DECS
Apple went straight for the enterprise with OS X servers. Remember all that triumphalism a few years back about a new supercomputer being built from Xserves? How OS X was going to be the new standard for supercomputing, how all the enterprises were going to switch switch switch? Yeah, nothing came of it, so of course the fanboys rewrite history so Apple only ever aimed for the home market.
What are you reading? I don't recall any of that guff and nor should anyone else. Lets dig back in history and see what was really said: Here's a journalist's transcript of the Xserve preview event in 2002 and here's a followup a few hours later with more details, neither of which bear out any of those assertions. The stated market was Education, Creative, Biotech and Video and they sold a lot into those areas, not to mention Government (find out how many Xserves are on U.S. Navy submarines running Linux).
As far as "triumphalism", the first anyone heard of the Mac supercomputer was when it made the top 10 Supercomputer list - and those were DESKTOPS! That generated its own hooplah when, once again, the extablishment was pulling another stick out of its eye for underperforming and overbilling.
Most of the stuff on
I thought your post was very good, insightful, if you will. But then you trundled out this old saw
"given that it's [iPod] technically inferior to products from rivals"
I am sick of hearing this. Technically inferior? Why, because it doesn't have worthless features like wi-fi or an FM tuner?
Sure there are ways to improve the iPod, but all in all, it is very well designed. Apple seems to have the sadly unique ability to choose a relatively small set of options and make them all the right options. I have had an iPod for two years now, and I have never wished for features that don't exist (with the possible exception of an easily replaceable battery.)
blah blah blah
Article worked for me too.
So is it that the article itself is biased, accidentally wrong or just written by a bitter Apple-supporter who can't stand people laughing at this overpriced, yet-to-come non-news? Either way: It's written by a moron or a zealot and this is pretty obvious.
He complains that "Installing Palm OS software on Windows requires admin rights, forcing an administrator to install the software on every machine that syncs with a Palm.", then follows up with this:
What does the iPhone require of IT? Installation of iTunes, which users can manage themselves.You seriously can't mean that this is a good article.
I could go into more details, but really. If seeing that ain't enough to convince you this guy is a overly biased Apple-zealot, then nothing will.
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
is not a "special interest feature."
Apple could have killed about 20 birds with one stone if they had polished their internal SDK up a bit and released it with the iPhone. Instead they chose to massively insult their developer crowd at WWDC by passing off AJAX as a "sweet solution." What happens to their "sweet solution" when there is no network available?
Ballmer may be a whackjob, but he's right about four things: "Developers, developers, developers, developers." Without those, your "smart" product looks pretty dumb.
What is the upshot of all this? A closed box with fancy tricks is not worth $499. An open box with OSX running underneath it that can run a Skype client (appealing to personal users), a variety of media players (appealing to personal users), games that actually make use of the hardware (appealing to personal users) and other things we haven't even thought of yet *IS* worth $499.
+++ATH0
Who's "most people?" You and your friends?
I think you are missing the reason clubs and bars make so much money.
+++ATH0
"The iPhone is nothing special"
User interfaces are nothing special. Just pixels and events. Computers are nothing special, just carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, silicon and other elements we can find easily in the world around us. Electricity is nothing special, it's just using natural phenomena to produce power.
The iPhone is nothing special.
"Frankly, being associated with Apple gets a negative mark in my book."
Ah. A zealot. Why didn't you say so earlier?
"Going out dancing or bar hopping with a Treo clipped to your hip just looks stupid"
Actually, clipping anything to your belt, whether it's a sliderule, calculator or phone looks stupid.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
The quote is accurate. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_LAN : "On July 21, 1999, AirPort debuted at the Macworld Expo in New York City with Steve Jobs picking up an iBook supposedly to give the cameraman a better shot as he surfed the Web. Applause quickly built as people realized there were no wires. This was the first time Wireless LAN became publicly available at consumer pricing and easily available for home use. Before the release of the Airport, Wireless LAN was too expensive for consumer use and used exclusively in large corporate settings."
(if you don't trust wikipedia, I'm sure you can find 100 other sources that will say the same thing)
The percentage that are using AirPort today is irrelevant to whether or not AirPort introduced Wi-fi to a mainstream audience.
That article was completely biased towards the iPhone even though the author has never even used one. So many people entirely miss the point of what a Smartphone is supposed to be for the corporate world. I feel like the problem truly is that most, like the author of this article, have never used a Windows Mobile 5/6 Smartphone/PPC in a properly set up environment. Most people in fact that have used a Blackberry or Windows Mobile phone have never used them with an Exchange server or BES. Until you have used a WM5/6 phone with an Exchange 2003/7 server, I don't think that you are ready to actually critique the usefulness of Microsoft's platform.
This article advocates that the corporate world should accept the iPhone with open arms against the analysts wishes. Although the article makes this claim, the iPhone doesn't support the most basic requirements of an enterprise-grade Smartphone's purpose; over-the-air Groupware/PIM! Without supporting OTA PIM, I can't leave the office and continue working effectively...
From what we know so far, the iPhone doesn't support any of these features, even when used in conjunction with a Mac OS X 10.5 Server. Until the iPhone can meet my basic PIM needs, I have no reason to consider it instead of my HTC TyTN running WM6 Pro, and I feel that businesses need to reconsider the iPhone for these same reasons.
With all that said, I love what the iPhone is doing to stir up the Smartphone business! Hopefully all manufacturers will take notice of the iPhone's interface and start competing with creative new designs that will eventually benefit all consumers.
An SDK is not a "special interest feature."
Look, I've done mobile development. I want an SDK badly.
But an SDK not being a "special interest feature"? Come on, you know 99% of phone buyers are not going to be developing thier own applications.
As for buying or using other apps, that's where you get into the greay area of how many apps people buy today are replacable with web based versions, how many Apple will bring to market for third parties, and how useful the internal applications are (since Windows Mobile users I know are mostly buying apps to replace built-in phone applications which are terrible).
As SDk is delightful but there are other ways to fulfil the general needs an SDK addresses without offering an SDK to everyone.
In time, I'm sure we'll have a fuller SDK - but in the meantime the compromise offered will be good enough to fill many application needs, at least all the ones I had ever bought for the Palm.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
So you are saying Palm software does not require admin rights to install? I have never installed Palm software on Windows, so I have no idea - but after seeing what the Mac installer for Palm Desktop does this would not surprise me.
As for iTunes, many people have it installed already, there's really no need for IT to do so.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Can we please stop issuing story after story on this thing until it actually comes out?
I'm a big fan of Apple's products, and have been almost exclusively using apple PCs since the 90s. Granted, I'm not loaded with cash, and don't rush to the nearest store anytime Apple releases a product (the longevity of their machines perhaps the biggest selling point for me. My 1999 450mhz PowerMac G4 is still chugging along, running the latest release of OS X 10.4. It's outlived my car.)
But I digress. The level of press coverage the iPhone is receiving is insane and disproportionate. I could easily deal with a flurry of press coverage around the time of the announcement, and shortly after the release (reviews, and first impressions). However, the level of hype and idle speculation building up is absurd for a product that hasn't even been released yet.
Yes. I appreciate that the iPhone is one of the first smartphones to get a properly-designed UI that wasn't created by a group of telco accountants (anybody who's ever had to deal with Verizon's "standard" UI knows exactly what I'm talking about). It could even very well revolutionize the mobile phone industry, (finally) bringing it into the data age.
It's also extremely expensive, and there's no way in hell I'll be able to afford one, or even remotely justify the cost. Remember that the iPod didn't achieve massive widespread popularity until the prices dropped considerably.
However, none of this has happened yet. It hasn't been released. Let's just hold onto our horses, wait a week, and conclusively answer these questions once the damn thing is in stores. You're all setting yourselves up for a massive letdown.
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
"I am sick of hearing this. Technically inferior? Why, because it doesn't have worthless features like wi-fi or an FM tuner?"
I would like my iPod to play OGGs. For all this talk in TFA about 'open standards', the iPod and iPhone don't support the most open standard of all.
(Of course, this is only important to me because I've ripped all my music to Ogg and don't want to have to convert lossy to lossy or re-rip.)
But an SDK not being a "special interest feature"? Come on, you know 99% of phone buyers are not going to be developing thier own applications.
The SDK is not for the 99% of phone buyers. It is for the 1% of people who know how to use it. That way that 99% of phone buyers has other applications to use on their phones.
+++ATH0
And the hackers would have released hundreds of "Applications" for the iPhone that bricked it.
From what orifice did you pluck this phantom boogeyman? There are about 12 applications on my Cingular 8525 and none of those "bricked it." There is a huge market of 3rd party applications for Palm and WM and none of those brick phones. Get real.
+++ATH0
Is there any reason to believe that the iPhone could not maintain local web pages? Even the iPod can sync and display hyperlinked "Notes," which provide a subset of HTML to create navigable pages of information that can hyperlink to songs stored on the device. Why wouldn't the iPhone be able to copy local web pages that perform with all the functionality of a Dashboard Widget, along with the ability to dial, reference songs and other media, display linked graphics, execute JavaScript, etc.
Why would you assume it would not? If the iPhone artificially does not allow local web pages, that would be both odd and stupid of Apple, and would rightfully generate complaint. Since there has been no reason to assume such a bone-head move, maybe we should wait to see if Apple makes the mistake before complaining.
After all, the postulated complaints that its battery would be too short, its screen would scratch too easy, it couldn't use the iPhone name, it wouldn't be able to open any Word or Excel docs, and that IT shops would have no way to design custom apps for it all turned out to be non-problems.
I work in a real estate office of about 50 people. Around 30 or so of them have Treos. A few others have Blackberries. Very few have just plain old regular cell phones. You want to know why these folks got Treos? Because they had Palm PDAs before hand and got tired of carrying around a Palm PDA AND a Cell Phone. The overwhelming majority of them don't even Install the Palm Desktop software to sync with their computers and install new apps. This is not a rare occurance. People in other offices act this way as well. This is the NORM. Getting people to sync things is DIFFICULT. You have to give them a reason to do so, something better than "it provides you with a data backup in case your device crashes and loses all its data." I've tried and tried and tried to get people to install their Palm Desktop software to no avail. Want to know one thing they DO have on their computers? iTunes which just so happens to sync with the iPod and iPhone.
The number of people who actually install 3rd party applications onto Palm OS/WM smartphones has been GROSSLY over estimated. The bare basic PIM functions of these smartphones is all most of these folks are looking for. With the Smartphone we had gone from 2 devices to 1 but then the iPod came out bringing us back to 2 devices. For some folks who haven't upgraded to Smartphones yet they're actually still at 3 devices now. The iPhone is THE convergence device that will bring nearly everyone back to having just one device. And Apple will be able to intice more people to install 3rd party applications onto their iPhones than all other smartphones COMBINED.
So to recap, the lack of an SDK here is a non-event. Its totally immaterial. It just doesn't matter at all in the grand scheme of things. The iPhone is going to sell like hotcakes, out selling all other smartphones individually and combined because of its INTERFACE, not because you can or cannot install 3rd party apps on it from launch.
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
Apple related threads sound like we're not talking about consumer products: even the naysayers sometime seem to be their own kind of zealots. Those may be good or even great products (didn't try), but still, it is mainly a marketing strategy.
The way I look at it is the following:
+ nice UI
+ nice screen
+ small
+ nice music/video player
+ looks good
- very expensive compared to other phones
- no 3G
- no unlocking or portability to other carriers
- no GPS
- forced to use, and register with, iTunes
- no touch typing
- bad camera
- two year lock
- very limited programmability
- I don't like being lied to by Jobs about why the iPhone isn't programmable
Lack of programmability means that I don't get a number of things I have had on every phone for the last several years: an open source password safe, an SSH and VNC client, and a good e-book reader.
I expect that there will be a whole range of really exciting new phones coming out, some of which have been in the pipeline, and others inspired by the iPhone. I think this is the wrong time to lock myself into a 2 year contract, in particular at that price.
than "local web pages." You need an entire CGI infrastructure to make local AJAX applications work (c.f. the "Google Gears" project).
I would assume it would not support this because a) GOOGLE has yet to get it working and b) If it was possible, Steve would have been talking it up at WWDC.
I assume this is Daniel Eran from RD posting, if so, good to talk to you again -- I've posted a couple comments on your blog that you've responded to and emails that you've also responded to. Let me make one thing absolutely clear -- I am not a knee-jerk Apple hater; quite the contrary -- I own a Macbook Pro which I ADORE and an eMac I rescued from my university's trash heap.
The thing that keeps galling me about the iPhone is the "could-have-beens." People have been speculating about and hoping for some kind of "pocket Mac" or "new Newton" for years, on the assertion that a machine like this running OSX would have all kinds of possibilities. Now, here we have just such a machine, and Apple is telling us that instead of being a powerful tool, it's going to be a shiny toy, and we'll like it that way. Despite the fact that there is nothing but software in the way of the iPhone's potential. It is enormously frustrating. As someone who considers himself at least on the level of "power user," it frustrated me when I heard there would be no SDK, but it really felt like a slap in the face when Steve Jobs had the balls to get up on the stage at WWDC and pretend that AJAX was something new and uniquely Apple.
I'm sure the iPhone will be a stunning success, but I have a feeling we'll still be sitting here waiting for Apple to rescue us from Windows Mobile for a long, long time.
+++ATH0
Ask yourself, with a 5 year head start, why are "smartphones" still only "Geek" toys? Why aren't they good enough for everybody?
Because they are:
A) Expensive (iPhone: check)
B) Huge (iPhone: check)
Most people prefer a basic little phone that does the job, cheaply. Nah, I don't need a touch screen to call someone.
Umm, you may have noticed how a certain Mr. Jobs has pulled the iPhone out of his non-cargo pant pocket.. So apparently carrying a bag or wearing cargo pants are NOT a requirement.
Apparently beer is more important to you than people.
Yes. Yes it is. As for the iPhone, would be glad to drop the phone part of it and have a web surfing video iPod and no contract lock in. Ok, I really want a Newton 3000.
I drank what? -- Socrates
The iPod has come a long way in audio quality since gen 1, but its relatively decent 83dB S/N ratio (shown here) gets flat-out whupped by the plainly excellent 98 dB S/N ratio of the Zen Xtra (here).
I'm guessing, from the mac.com address, that you'll either argue against this solid evidence with mac-protecting nonsense or not respond.
It's okay to buck the trend and admit two things:
1) It was a joke.
2) Apple is not always the best at everything. They are a company that, like many others, sells things manufactured by third parties in China, and, as with other companies, real-world cost-considerations come into play along with the limitations of their designers and engineers.
The second is probably harder to admit.
Happy dining...
Really, this is the kind of article I love with Roughly Drafted. It's outright advocacy, but not of the sort that can be ignored as simple enthusiasm. There has been an extraordinary bunch of criticism of a product that has not appeared, usually with people exclaiming, "But how can you be so positive? It hasn't appeared yet!" Well, that's true for both sides, of course. And, the basic point is that every objection you can make with the iPhone can also be said, in spades, for Windows Mobile and the Zune, and yet no boycotts were proposed for that, were they?
I certainly agree with you that there may be some deficits, particularly in early versions. I'm not spending my money on the 29th, at least. But I'm also glad to see the end game of this creativity: other smartphone makers will be forced to step up their games.
From the extensive needs you have of specific functions, it's probably true that you won't be well served by an iPhone. I think, frankly, Apple has its eye on a broader public than enterprise. MS keeps its eye on you and your needs. But there are, right now, a billion people who use cells; the market is very large. Maybe Apple will develop cheaper phones, iPods really, and more business-oriented software, I don't know. But I absolutely love the way they shake up a market. Whatever kind of phone you want -- and are you sure you don't want a small notebook? -- you're more likely to get it after the iPhone hits.
* Adobe Flash plugin
iPhones have Safari. I imagine that any plugin that would work on Safari would work on iPhone Safari, seeing as it's the same browser and the same OS. So, that should take care of Adobe Flash, though I'm not 100% certain on this. Considering how the iPhone is being advertised as YouTube-compatible, though, that seems encouraging.
* MS Office Document reader
Okay, granted, that would be nice. Then again, you have a browser - Google Docs to the rescue? I'll grant this isn't as nice as it could be, but it is possible.
* Barcode reader
Uhh... how many people need this? This being Slashdot, I anticipate seeing about 15 replies here all saying, "Yeah, I need a barcode reader! How could you not?" Outside of Slashdot, however, I've yet to meet a single person that has said to me, "Man, this phone would be perfect if only I could scan merchandise and perform store inventories with it." Yes, I know the plural for "anecdote" is not "data", and I know you can't prove a negative, but, even so, this one seems AWFULLY specialized.
* PDF/E-book reader
You know what comes with OS X? A little application called "Preview". It opens PDFs. It's nifty. Oh, and you can print PDF, too, though I don't imagine that'll be an oft-used feature on a phone.
* Voice recorder
Voice mail? I know, not the same thing. Yeah, that would be nice.
* VOIP
See, now we're just being silly. Let's keep in mind that Apple needs to be able to sell this in the US and had a rather heinous time convincing our wonderful cellular providers that selling phones that can get music from *outside the cellular provider's network* is not *evil*. That's why the ROKR happened - that was Apple's way of saying, "Okay, we'll play it your way - it'll suck, but we'll do it," so that way they could come up to the providers later and say, "See, it's not just our snazzy logo that sells stuff; if we're going to play, we need to play by OUR rules, not yours." Having Apple support a technology that would allow someone to purchase a phone that would subvert the primary business of a cellular provider just isn't happening at this point. Cellular providers barely want to do business with Apple in the first place, especially after watching what Apple's done to the recording industry and their DRM schemes.
Aside: Yes, I know that Apple has a DRM scheme, too, and I know nobody likes it here because, well, it's DRM, which means it's evil. However, before you start saying that Apple has done nothing about DRM, keep in mind that Microsoft did precisely what the content providers wanted with DRM and compare that with FairPlay - given a choice between the two, which would you choose? Outside of Microsoft, ever try getting an MP3 to transfer to a MiniDisc player? At least Apple plays nicely with non-DRM music and, in fact, is actually selling it now, without legal trouble. Plus, I see a lot more support for iPods on Linux than I do the PlaysForSure SanDisk Sanza that work gave me.
That said, even if the providers allowed it, Apple still wouldn't include VOIP support. Not directly. Why? Because it's complicated. You have to go to a WiFi spot so you have Internet access, at which point you punch up your VoIP application (probably Skype, I'm assuming), and then you can talk... until you walk, what, 70 meters, best case, in an 802.11n environment? How often are you going to be by an 802.11n network, anyways? Not very, at least in public - you're probably going to be in a mixed B/G environment, which is good for 35 meters, and, I don't know about you, but I've never been able to get anywhere near that in real life. I've been able to get consistently... 10, maybe 20 meters? So, as long as I don't plan on leaving my hous
Others have suggested that this is only Apple's opening salvo; that they will release the iPhone as it is now as a kind of "shakedown cruise" to work out any bugs and build its reputation as a rock-stable device, then after a while release the SDK and tout it as some kind of "new" technology. I hope this is precisely what happens. If it is, Apple will almost certainly be able to count me as a customer. If nothing else, I'd be thrilled to have a PDA phone that talks to Address Book and iCal (without third-party hackery as an intermediary). But I'm not hopeful. As I've said before, the "great" thing about being pessimistic about the intersection of business interests and technological development is that 90% of the time, you're right.
I'm not sure "what you want to do with a mobile." But right now my Cingular 8525 smartphone is better than or equal to the iPhone for what *I* want to do -- email, IM, phone/text/voice, music and movie playback, games, writing (yes, I actually do some writing in Pocket Word) and remote administration (with ssh and VNC) -- costs less and doesn't demand that I pay for a data plan just to run it on the network.
I really look forward to the day that this isn't the case, but that day is not today,
+++ATH0
Engadget is now on its best behavior, a 360 degree change from its earlier role ...
360 degree = 0 degree = no change. It should be 180 degree.
Pot and kettle syndrome with the IT management section. For someone who really is trying to dispel myth and rumour, they certainly like to generate it for other products. The comment about blackberry - why would Apple add revocation and other large scale enterprise features to a phone thats targetted at a personal user audience? "Installation of iTunes, which users can manage themselves." - irrelevant, most enterprises will not allow iTunes, having to back up relevant business data takes precedence, along with patch management. Being biased supporting a very large scale MS exchange enterprise, i fully disagree with the completely innaccurate: "Windows Mobile similarly requires ActiveSync to be running, and is a huge headache to support when synching with Exchange. Windows Mobile phones fall out of sync with Exchange regularly, forcing a full deletion of the user's calendar and email and a resync." No, wrong on both counts. Activesync is not mandatory to use a WM device as a phone and pda, and not everyone uses their mobile to its fullest extent like we geeks do. We have Blackberry and WM devices - roughly equal in the numbers we have deployed. Believe me, if WM devices fell out of sync "regularly", we'd drop it and go completely blackberry. WM2003 may have done this, but aren't we supposed to be comparing like for like technology? WM5 and 6 don't do this "regularly"
That was quick.
There are a lot of Apple haters, mostly with their fortunes tied to its failure. That's not going so well. TFA is just a response to the avalanche of bought-and-paid Microsoft FUD reporters who can't seem to get the term "unbiased" right. Call for an iPhone boycott? You can always hope - suckers. This article is biased toward outing those buffoons with nothing else to do except panic. I cringe at some the venom this guy has published, but as uppity and fanboyish as Dan is, he's mostly right.
You don't have to be Apple hater to hope it fails (!). A device claiming to be smartphone which its producer spitted worst FUD against Java just because he doesn't want his precious locked environment broken by millions of java developers is enough to hate it.Horrible media scene of Mac which apple.slashdot.org can't find unbiased articles to post is another factor.
Fanboys claiming they don't need Flash on a $600 devices browser adds more to your madness. As you can guess why Flash was not included, you go more mad. Just because they don't want iTunes competitors working inside Mini Safari of iPhone... IMHO of course.
I am not calling for boycott, I am just preventing my friends and family from falling into Apple's trick and buy iPhone instead of some real smart device which you can INSTALL SOFTWARE and CHANGE THE BATTERY. I am doing this as owner of 3 Macs at home alone and get Xserve (sometimes expensive) based services whenever I can.
Name them. If third party apps are really so important, name the ones that a majority of the smartphone market finds indespensible. This is just from Handango which is mainly Symbian download/license site... In fact, it is one of "classy" sites, people generally buy their software directly from Vendor.
http://corp.handango.com/Handango.jsp?siteId=1&ji
Millions of unique monthly visitors
650,000+ newsletter subscribers
190,000+ content titles
16,000+ content partners
Hundreds of licensees
Hundreds of countries
Dozens of currencies
Dozens of languages
9 operating systems
7+ years commercial usage
Lets see Opera Mini which is a J2ME (Java) Application which uses the platform Mr. Jobs claimed "nobody asked for it"
""This is a celebration for our users," said Jon von Tetzchner, CEO, Opera Software. "Thanks to the more than 10 million people who have downloaded and used Opera Mini, we've changed the way users and mobile operators think about the mobile Web. Because of the tremendous grassroots support, Opera Mini is now a movement."
http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2007/01/26/
These are CONSUMER/END USER products. VPN/Blackberry/Exchange/Notes etc. solutions which are purchased in bulk numbers in customised manner doesn't count. E.g. no company goes to Handango and add 10.000 VPN client licenses to "shopping cart" of course.
Opera's numbers excludes the massive numbers distributed by cell networks sometimes embedded in phone pre-installed too.
The reason the iPhone will work is the exact same reason the iPod did. Its nothing to do with having a million features and supporting every standard there is. The iPod is one of the most simple Mp3 players there is- and before I got one I hated the thought of it and bought a 20GB iRiver that has ogg, optical in and optical out, had radio, a mic etc etc. It did pretty much everything and yet all i used it for was to play music. I bought an iPod mini for a present for someone and once I tried it I had to get myself one. And did I miss ogg, radio, optical in/out? Not at all.
The iPhone isn't for geeks (though im sure most geeks will love it). Its for my mum, and my brother and my sister and aunt etc. Its going be simple and its going to work. Why would apple create some complex super phone for the small geek market when it can create a simple but brilliant phone for the masses? I love having lots of features, its why I have the N95 phone, but all I use it for is Voice, Text, Camera and Wi-fi. The 1001 other features it has is never used and the phone is unresponsive and slow and crashes. I just want a phone that can do the main features GOOD, and I'm guessing that most people (non-slashdoters that is) will want the same.
UI is everything. The iPod demonstrated that, and for all the people that complain there is too much hype over this phone, remember that apple didn't create this hype, its the reputation of their past products that did.
1) Company needs OTA groupware. They don't buy an iPhone: they use WM/Blackberry/etc
2) Company doesn't need OTA groupware. They buy whatever phones they can get cheap that work as a basic phone. They don't buy an iPhone.
3) Company doesn't need OTA groupware but decides that it's bored of making money for its shareholders, and buys everyone an iPhone for shits and giggles.
4) Company doesn't need OTA groupware, but does have a pressing need for its employees to be able to listen to MP3s all day, post pictures to Flickr and mess with Google Maps. They buy the iPhone.
I don't know about you, but 3) and 4) don't seem to be a huge demographic...
In a correctly configured corporate network, individual users should not have rights to install any software. Desktop users should be running as "user" without administrator rights. This prohibits them from installing software that modifies windows or programs -- it also protects them against most viruses. In general, users should not be about to install any software other than corporate approved. Most companies have a standard image that does or doesn not include software like itunes. In many environments that isn't any need for itunes so it would not be installed.
Actually on the mac there is the same issue... individual users should not have the "admin" password so they will need IT support to install software like itunes (if not pre-installed).
The general answer is that Apple doesn't get corporate. This is the reason that Macs are so rare in corporate (> 500 employees) environments.
If my CEO gets one and hooks it into our mail systems, and then it gets stolen (Remember when iPods were new and they were getting stolen all the time?), how am I going to remotely wipe all of the data from it?
Same way you remotely wipe all the data from a Treo. Or even a Blackberry.
You don't, unless they're stupid enough to hook it up to the network before they pull the data out.
You enforce remote security with an encrypted database that you don't keep the key to in the handheld, or simply not keeping data in the handheld. Anything else is no better than "you must be this tall to storm the castle".
Wow, I wish I had my moderator points from yesterday for this post. :-)
How is it that this is moderated "+5 insightful" when it's basically just a personal attack on the author of the article? I thought Ad Hominem attacks like "It's written by a moron or a zealot.." were more for youth oriented sites Giz and Engadget?
The poster of this comment tries to point out a logical fallacy in the article (that doesn't actually exist), and then follows up with another insult ("... this guy is an overly biased Apple-zealot..") and it comes out +5 insightful?
Please keep the monkeys away from the moderating system!
While it's statistically possible they might end up with Shakespearen critiques, it's more likely they will fling poo around like this fellow did.