Slashdot Mirror


Here Comes iPhone Nano, But Not In the US

jehovajerieh writes to us in the time-honored tradition of rampant Apple speculation, pointing to an article over on IBTimes suggesting that while the iPhone Nano may be on the way, the US might not be the first to experience this gadget bliss. "Despite limited information in the supplier channels and typical secrecy with new Apple products, insiders have confirmed that the iPhone nano is not yet in the testing labs at AT&T, Marshal says, leading him to believe that the launch will most likely be with a non-US carrier. 'Obviously, the best-case scenario here would be a China launch (~600mil+ wireless subscribers total in the country), but we have no definitive knowledge of this and are working on identifying the [locale] of launch and other pertinent details,' he said."

177 comments

  1. iPhone Shito by sexconker · · Score: 0, Troll

    Who cares?

    1. Re:iPhone Shito by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 4, Funny

      iDon't

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
  2. Stupid by Jonah+Bomber · · Score: 0

    Stupid AT&T.

  3. Why build an iPhone Nano? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What'd be the point? iPhone applications aren't coded to run at multiple resolutions (something that will be a problem when/if a hybrid MacOS/iPhone tablet PC comes along), and there's not much to be gained by using a smaller battery or lower-power CPU. I don't understand why everyone expects a smaller, cheaper iPhone to be released. Who'd buy it, and why?

    1. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by plasmacutter · · Score: 1, Insightful

      What'd be the point? iPhone applications aren't coded to run at multiple resolutions (something that will be a problem when/if a hybrid MacOS/iPhone tablet PC comes along), and there's not much to be gained by using a smaller battery or lower-power CPU. I don't understand why everyone expects a smaller, cheaper iPhone to be released. Who'd buy it, and why?

      replace all instances of "iphone nano" with "iphone"
      replace all instances of "iphone" with "blackberry"
      replace macos/iphone tablet pc with VOIP over mobile broadband
      now you have the same scenario from years ago.

      Apple's iphone platform (unlike their professional computer line) serves no use, but they made a market for it anyway as a fashion accessory.

      Fashion is not subject to the laws of usability, interface design, or return on income.

      --
      VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
    2. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by ByOhTek · · Score: 4, Funny

      It makes them happier to be one step closer to the iPhone shuffle?

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    3. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by samkass · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, a lot of iPhone apps would auto-scale to any resolution. Interface Builder defines the way panes adjust when the window size changes. It's the 3D games that will likely have to change if they've hardcoded frame buffer sizes, but even those should be a quick port to alternate dimensions. It's kind of inevitable that Apple will release an iPhone-like device of different screen dimensions, and they're pretty well-prepared for it even if perhaps it won't run EVERY fart-noise generator on the market from day 1.

      --
      E pluribus unum
    4. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Malc · · Score: 1

      Well I'm not buying the current iPhone because it's too large. It's not going to fit in pocket as well as my 83g Samsung SGH-E730, which I hardly notice is there most of the time - perfect. It's pretty functional too, giving my POP3 and SMTP access anywhere I go in the world except Japan and S. Korea. Maybe a Nano would be something I could consider as an eventual replacement.

    5. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      replace all instances of "iphone nano" with "iphone"

      Cannot find string "iphone nano". Replace 0 occurrence(s).

    6. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Supergibbs · · Score: 1

      You forgot the \IncludeTitle flag....

      --
      First post! (just in case I am...)
    7. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by plasmacutter · · Score: 1

      or "include summary"

      --
      VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
    8. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by cinderblock · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This will be a completely different class of iPhone. They don't want to make a small iPhone, they want a cheap iPhone. That means say goodbye to all the fun UI stuff that has made the iPhone so good because they'll probably make it an iPhone wheel (think MacBook wheel).

    9. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by x102output · · Score: 1

      Fashion is not subject to the laws of usability, interface design, or return on income.

      Um...according to anyone outside of slashdot, the iPhone is ALL about interface and usability. That's why it's selling so good.

    10. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Carewolf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because the classic iPhone is huge heavy brick that many potential customers would be embarresed lugging around. By going down a size the new iPhone nano might be the size of a mobile phone.

    11. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For me, the purpose of an iPhone "Nano" isn't about getting a smaller phone, but rather offering a version of the iPhone that doesn't cost you ~$80-$90 a month to own. That's the biggest thing holding me back right now and I imagine a lot of others. I would be willing to pay for a WiFi version of the iPhone if I could use with my existing plan without having any extra fees...

    12. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      500,000 Apple users with a bad case of cognitive dissonance doesn't change 30 years of UI research and development.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    13. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by 0prime · · Score: 5, Funny

      *dial*
      Help, my office is on fire, sen... what? You're not the fire department, ok, ok... ok, bye.
      *>>*
      Help, my office is on fi... Roy? Well, can you call the fire department and tell them the of... what do you mean you bought an iPhone shuffle too?! Fine... FINE... bye.
      ...
      *gets on computer*
      *opens e-mail*

      "Subject: Fire.

      Dear Sir/Madam, I am writing to inform you of a fire that has broken out on the premises of 123 Cavendon Road..."

      no, that's too formal.
      *deletes text, starts again*
      "Fire! fire! help me! 123 Cavendon Road. Looking forward to hearing from you.

      Yours truly, Maurice Moss."

      --
      I am not a *blank*, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
    14. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Cynonamous+Anoward · · Score: 5, Funny

      "a quick port to alternate dimensions"

      Strange...Jobs told me that Apple wouldn't have that working until 2013.

      --
      "The GPL is viral by design, like any good religion."
    15. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, the iPhone shuffle. One speaker, one receiver, and one button. Perfect for the drunk dialer in your family...

    16. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by youthoftoday · · Score: 4, Funny

      at least with a Mac you don't get "it looks like you're writing a letter!"

      --
      -1 not first post
    17. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice screensaver! I like how the smoke seems to be coming off the screen.

    18. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by moosesocks · · Score: 2, Informative

      Are you serious?

      I sincerely doubt that most people are purchasing iPhones because it's a fashion accessory. I'm sure there are those who are, but that's not the point.

      The iPhone is a Blackberry for non-business types. It also offers a number of innovations that are genuinely useful, and not available anywhere else (a web-browser that doesn't suck, a media player that actually integrates well into the rest of the phone, and visual voicemail to name a few)

      I don't own one. I'm locked into a contract with Verizon, and even if I wasn't, I still couldn't afford one. However, I'll gladly acknowledge that the iPhone's feature-set is extremely attractive. The fact that it's rather slick-looking is just icing on the cake.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    19. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by arb+phd+slp · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Except for the users who are only Apple users AFTER they got their iPod and iPhone and loved them. There are lots of those.

      --
      There's a perfect xkcd for my sig but I'm too lazy to look it up. sudo someone go find it.
    20. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about you guys but as a normal phone the iphone sucks, because it's so big, yes considering that most of the time a phone just sits idle in your pocket anyway. That's why I'm not into smartphones. I just need to make calls, store an appointment in a calendar(reminders), or occasionally take a picture but that's about it. I really love the touchscreen interface but somehow an lg phone for example, fits my hands perfectly and I can actually use it with ease with just one hand regardless if it has a touchscreen or not whereas I always hold the iphone with one hand while using it with the other.
      I just fell really rough because of some ice, and got a hand temporary disabled and kind of appreciate the size :)

    21. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Wait, you mean that MacOS and iPhone do not share the same code base and visual scaling capabilities? IE, the whole "graphical elements will scale with resolution" thing on OS X does not apply on iPhone?

      Wow, talk aout short sighted. Here I was, thinking they'd be well suited for such a market. Guess not.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    22. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like you dont know how to turn that off...
      I'm no fan of MS but I'm also no fan of Apple either. (Dont get me started on Linux)They both have their strength and weaknesses. I'm more excited for alternative OSes out there. Not based off of NT or Unix at their core. Where hardware is more important, and where software is both simple and need customizable. Oh and could I get a small footprint too?

    23. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the classic iPhone is huge heavy brick that many potential customers would be embarresed lugging around

      I guess "Score: 4, Insightful" is the new "Score: 2, High."

    24. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by lymond01 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'll agree here. While the iPhone interface is better than anything out there by a million miles, I can see that if it has incomplete Exchange integration it would be a problem for "business users". I'm an IT guy at a university -- the iPhone is just about my perfect sidekick:

      - IMAP Email (I don't use Exchange)
      - Wifi for web access (look up stuff from the server room)
      - SSH client (I paid $5 for it)
      - Phone in place of a pager

      I honestly didn't care what it looked like, but the large screen sort of limits it to big and flat. What sold me in the end was its usability -- the interface is clean, user-friendly, communicative. Way better than the RAZR I was using, even though the features overlap (except for wireless).

    25. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple's iphone platform (unlike their professional computer line) serves no use, but they made a market for it anyway as a fashion accessory.

      Are you daft or just senile? I use my iPhone for my job, and so far it's paid for itself several times over. (Before I got the iPhone, I tried some smartphones from Samsung and Palm, and quickly discovered they were crap.)

      And of course that just barely scratches the usefulness of being able to consult Google and Wikipedia (almost) whenever and (almost) wherever I want.

    26. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by floodo1 · · Score: 1

      yeah cuz the wheel is a great interface for dialing!

      --
      I KUT J00 M4NG!!!
    27. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Anpheus · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah but it'll take 20 minutes to write and at the bottom it says:

      "Sent from my Macbook Wheel."

    28. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by cgenman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Apple's iphone platform (unlike their professional computer line) serves no use, but they made a market for it anyway as a fashion accessory.

      My iPhone lets me edit online shared documents through Evernote, access shared google calendars, send / recieve e-mail in a halfway descent interface, check my balances, log work times and bill clients directly from my phone, find myself when lost driving to said clients, and plays a mean game of Sim City.

      And as far as I can tell the iPhone has become a symbol of uncoolness, an anti-fashion accessory, simply by being too popular.

      I had a Treo for years, and it didn't have half of the functionality of the iPhone. On the flip side, I've used Linux phones with ostensibly as much functionality as the iPhone, but I never got the damned applications to work right without spending hours online.

      It is powerful and usable. Don't let your chosen phone cloud the fact that the iPhone is being purchased en masse because it actually is pretty good.

    29. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If anyone is wondering what this is from:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqQ6Z-HmAqY

      IT Crowd, episode 2 "Calamity Jen"

      - AJK

    30. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Easily solved once the device is actually working. Time/dimension machines have an arbitrary date of release. My guess is that this feature exists in the 25th Anniversary Mac, we just don't know it yet.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    31. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by GregNorc · · Score: 1

      As of Office 2007, you don't get it on Windows either.

    32. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If an iPhone nano happens, some people are speculating it might be the same as an iPhone but with lower power components and a higher pixel density screen. So it will still be 320 x 480 resolution, but with higher density they get a smaller device. And with lower power components you can get the same battery life with a smaller battery.

      Granted, there are a lot of problems with this theory. First, apps are made assuming a certain touch area based on the larger screens. Many apps would be nearly unusable on a smaller screen nano without a stylus (hint?). Second, lower power and smaller components at the same performance might mean higher yield, but it also usually means a more expensive and error prone manufacturing process.

      This might suggest a different, incompatible platform. Rather, not a platform at all. But a stripped down device that is not capable of using the App Store. To this alternative theory's credit, lots of people bought iPhones before it was possible to download third-party apps. It will merely be a disposable non-upgradable phone like all the rest in the market except with Apple styling, a decent browser, and same features the original iPhone was released with.

    33. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Meski · · Score: 1

      And by then, Job's obit will be published, and it will be SEP.

    34. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Meski · · Score: 1

      Back to a rotary dial. How retro.

    35. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      Go sit in your corner Major Buzzkill.

    36. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's some cognitive dissonance in this thread, all right, but it isn't coming from iPhone users.

    37. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

      My guess is that this feature exists in the 25th Anniversary Mac, we just don't know it yet.

      Given that the 20th Anniversary Mac is already 12 years old, what machine would you propose as the "25th Anniversary Mac?" The iMac G4 and 14" iBook were introduced about five years after the 20th Anniversary Mac.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    38. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

      As of using Eudora/Outlook Express/etc. you don't get it on Windows EVER.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    39. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by sniperu · · Score: 1

      One word for you: Nokia

    40. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by Greatmoose · · Score: 1

      Indeed. I am one of them. Generally think that Apple products are the height of douchebaggery, but then I was given an iphone to test. Love it. Waaaaay better than the piece of crap MotoQ and Blackberry I had previously.

      --
      Clearly I forgot to equip my +5 Codpiece of Karma.
    41. Re:Why build an iPhone Nano? by dangitman · · Score: 1

      what machine would you propose as the "25th Anniversary Mac?"

      Whatever machine the time-traveling nanoreplicators decide to build.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  4. Big Eyecatching Caption to attrract eyeballs by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 5, Interesting
    TFA has absolutely nothing of substance. Looks like they're just trying to attract click revenue.

    If Apple did release the Nanophone elsewhere then it would be the first time they'd done a product launch that excluded USA.

    Of course it would not be surprising if competitors are pushing the concept to create demand which they can fill with a "me too" product. "Me too" that is, except that the original does not exist. Various Chinese companies make a bundle out of "me toos", so this strategy could appeal there.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:Big Eyecatching Caption to attrract eyeballs by whisper_jeff · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Looks like they're just trying to attract click revenue."

      Agreed but I did my part to foil their plans - Firefox with AdBlock for the win. :)

      Seriously though, fluff pieces like this shouldn't appear on Slashdot. They're nothing more than attempts to inflate ad revenue. They have absolutely nothing of substance. That "article" didn't tell me a single thing. Complete waste of thee minutes of my life.

    2. Re:Big Eyecatching Caption to attrract eyeballs by Anthony_Cargile · · Score: 5, Funny

      People actually visit the linked articles? Astounding...

    3. Re:Big Eyecatching Caption to attrract eyeballs by Dishevel · · Score: 5, Funny

      What is this "Article" you speak of?

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    4. Re:Big Eyecatching Caption to attrract eyeballs by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 1

      Slashdot uses these fluff pieces to inflate THEIR ad revenue. The more people reply and bitch about TFA, the more money /. makes from ads.

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    5. Re:Big Eyecatching Caption to attrract eyeballs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're not supposed to actually rtfa. this is slashdot.

    6. Re:Big Eyecatching Caption to attrract eyeballs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The what, now?

    7. Re:Big Eyecatching Caption to attrract eyeballs by the_fat_kid · · Score: 1

      wait, you must be new here...

      --
      -- Sig under construction...
    8. Re:Big Eyecatching Caption to attrract eyeballs by TRRosen · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually Apple has released products that never sold in the US. Of course this was in the evil Performa times. PowerMac 8200, Black 5400,Color Classic II.

    9. Re:Big Eyecatching Caption to attrract eyeballs by Kingrames · · Score: 1

      Only for the purposes of slashdotting their server.

      --
      If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
    10. Re:Big Eyecatching Caption to attrract eyeballs by ignavus · · Score: 1

      Personally I doubt the existence of "articles".

      People keep talking about them but I have never seen one.

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
    11. Re:Big Eyecatching Caption to attrract eyeballs by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 1

      Macintosh IIvi
      Powerbook 2400c
      Powerbook 550c

      --
      http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    12. Re:Big Eyecatching Caption to attrract eyeballs by damsa · · Score: 1

      Bandai Pippin.

    13. Re:Big Eyecatching Caption to attrract eyeballs by bainjohn · · Score: 1

      I loved my PowerMac 8200 but it was basically the 7200 but in tower form.

  5. Er... what? by nine-times · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So this guy is insisting that Apple's providing an iPhone Nano in spite of having no evidence other than, "I think it would make sense for them to do it", and when there's evidence that AT&T doesn't know anything about it, he draws the conclusion that they'll launch it in China first?

    Based on what? How many products have Apple launched in countries other than the US in the past few years?

    1. Re:Er... what? by Macrat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's all it takes to make money off the web ads on the page.

    2. Re:Er... what? by paulthomas · · Score: 1

      Moreover, the iPhone only sells through the secondary market in mainland China -- you can buy unlocked iPhones in Hong Kong due to regulations.

    3. Re:Er... what? by fermion · · Score: 1
      What has apparently happened is that third parties have created iPhone Nano knockoffs in preparation for the Apple launch. This is evidently quite common. If once google iphone nano, there are many claims of phones in Asia that look like small iPhones, complete with the Apple logo.

      It is likely that this person has mistaken these knockoffs for the real product, unless of course these are not knockoffs but advance merchandise. As mentioned, however, this would be unprecedented as Apple has never launched a product solely outside the US. It would also be unusual because the Asia market seems to lack gadgets with lots of features, something the iPhone is not. For instance, there is no way to watch tv on the device, other than a limited youtube.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  6. Hmm... by ivan256 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    insiders have confirmed that the iPhone nano is not yet in the testing labs at AT&T, Marshal says, leading him to believe that the launch will most likely be with a non-US carrier.

    Simpler explaination: It doesn't exist.

    1. Re:Hmm... by ivan256 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Alternate explaination: A US carrier other than AT&T. Perhaps T-Mobile.

    2. Re:Hmm... by lethargic8 · · Score: 1

      I guess this writer never heard of Occam's Razor

    3. Re:Hmm... by slimjim8094 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Except Verizon sucks and probably would *never* agree to the kind of unlimited bandwidth you get through the iPhone. Especially not for $30/mo (which incidentally existed for their smartphones for years)

      And even *if* they did all that, they'd be a lot more restrictive about the functionality allowed because it's Verizon.

      I think the iPhone is plenty popular enough for AT&T. Literally more than half the people I know with an iPhone switched off Verizon to get one.

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    4. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd be very surprised if, due to the exclusive US distribution contract, either Apple or AT&T have much flexibility - Apple's probably prohibited from selling phones through any other carrier & I doubt that AT&T can carry anything that directly competes with the iPhone. Pulling numbers out of my ass, we're probably talking about a 2-5 year deal.

    5. Re:Hmm... by jonwil · · Score: 1

      Verizon will NEVER allow any phone on its network if that phone allows you to run apps Verizon hasn't given approval to.
      Personally, I want to see AT&T or T-Mobile spend whatever it takes to build more towers so they can match the coverage of Verizon (at least in urban areas)

    6. Re:Hmm... by Zerth · · Score: 1

      Unless it is a blackberry, then verizon rolls over.

    7. Re:Hmm... by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      Plenty of phone makers have exclusive phones with one carrier, but different phones with another. Is there some reason to believe that Apple's deal is different than something Motorola, or RIM would have?

  7. They have a new app at the iPhone store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    You shake up your iPhone and it tells you where the next iPhone rollout will be and where to get good sushi.

  8. ScuttleMonkey by Kuj0317 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Can we just get rid of him?

    1. Re:ScuttleMonkey by Anthony_Cargile · · Score: 1

      (Score: -2, ineedthisjob)

    2. Re:ScuttleMonkey by evanbd · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes. Your user screen -> preferences -> authors. Uncheck the box of any you don't want to see.

    3. Re:ScuttleMonkey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I tried that and ended up unchecking ALL of them; kind of defeats the point, doesn't it?

    4. Re:ScuttleMonkey by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 2, Informative

      Annoyingly, those preferences don't work for the RSS feed...

    5. Re:ScuttleMonkey by rtfa-troll · · Score: 1

      No no. There's a hidden button which I'll link to indirectly which completely changes all the authors. Warning. Do not follow link without having a non nerd helper on standby. It may have a stronger effect on you than a .cx link.

      --
      =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
    6. Re:ScuttleMonkey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yay! You just made /. a 100% better for me. Thank you.

    7. Re:ScuttleMonkey by flosofl · · Score: 0

      Annoyingly, those preferences don't work for the RSS feed...

      And if you'd think about it for second, you'd realize why.

      --
      "This calls for a very special blend of psychology and extreme violence" - Vyvyan "The Young Ones"
    8. Re:ScuttleMonkey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same way we 'got rid of' Roland Piquepalle...?

    9. Re:ScuttleMonkey by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      Go on,

      Pray tell ?

    10. Re:ScuttleMonkey by flosofl · · Score: 1

      The site preferences are tied to your user account. they aren't applied unless you are logged in to the site. The RSS feed for Slashdot is an anonymous connection. Any preferences tied to your user account wouldn't be applied to the feed in your RSS reader. I thought something like that would be rather obvious.

      --
      "This calls for a very special blend of psychology and extreme violence" - Vyvyan "The Young Ones"
  9. Who cares? by MikeRT · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The iPhone is a different platform from the original iPod. The nano worked there because there were no third part applications that depended on screen size assumptions and things like that. I would be surprise if a lot of the software written for the iPhone would work as well on the nano because it's going to be a smaller device, and that means that the user interface will be harder to deal with. Safari is just barely usable comfortably, for example. I can't imagine using it if it were even smaller.

    1. Re:Who cares? by e2d2 · · Score: 2, Informative

      This is something every mobile developer should already know and prepare for - alternate viewing resolutions. I know I do. Just like a windowed application one can determine the proper display format based on system information and adjust the display accordingly. IMHO It's not a huge hurdle for development, more like a tiny speed bump.

      Yes it's tricky making apps on really small screens. Welcome to mobile development.

    2. Re:Who cares? by joh · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There's no reason to assume that an iPhone nano will run *any* third-party apps at all. Think of it as an iPod nano with an integrated phone and it almost makes sense. There's no need for an sophisticated OS or third-party apps then. Just a small iPod with a phone, that's it. Nothing wrong with that idea either.

  10. Smaller? by A.+B3ttik · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How much smaller can they make the iPhone while still retaining the trademark touchscreen applications?

    The appeal of the iPhone is that you can do anything with it... it's an iPod, a phone, a browser, a gameboy, a GPS, etc. Making it even half as small is going to severely hamper a lot of this functionality. Who wants a browser with even less screen size than the current iPhone? What games could you play on a screen that small? How would you be able to use it as a TomTom when the screen size is no larger than a pack of matches?

    This is to say nothing of how difficult it would be to control such a tiny interface with the already inaccurate touchscreen.

    1. Re:Smaller? by hack++slash · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "The appeal of the iPhone is that you can do anything with it... "

      uh, MMS?

      --
      To do something right, you often have to roll up your sleeves and get busy.
    2. Re:Smaller? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      It's an Apple product. Anything it does is an essential feature that all competing products must not only have, but improve upon. Conversely, anything it lacks is a useless, tacked-on 'feature' designed to add a bullet point to a buzzword list, and you neither want, nor need it.

    3. Re:Smaller? by JamesRose · · Score: 1

      I think you'll find a large number of people would say they crossed the functionality vs. size line with iPhone already.

    4. Re:Smaller? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is to say nothing of how difficult it would be to control such a tiny interface with the already inaccurate touchscreen.

      So, I have fat fingers, you insensitive clod !

    5. Re:Smaller? by astrodoom · · Score: 1

      What games could you play on a screen that small?

      pixel tetris, micro mario brothers, racing games where the only car choices you have are pt cruisers, VW bugs, and electric cars.

    6. Re:Smaller? by mini+me · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Email can do everything MMS can. Clearly it is the phones that do MMS but not email that are broken.

    7. Re:Smaller? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How would you be able to use it as a TomTom when the screen size is no larger than a pack of matches?

      Errr, maybe they'd make it do voice turn-by-turn directions like a GPS device is intended to do...

    8. Re:Smaller? by jrmcc · · Score: 1

      Didn't you see Zoolander? (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0196229/)

    9. Re:Smaller? by mini+me · · Score: 1

      Who says the screen has to be smaller? They could make a flip phone that is half the size when closed, but has the same sized screen when open.

    10. Re:Smaller? by Carewolf · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Can you email pictures to all 98.5% of worlds population that doesn't have iPhones? If 98,5% of devices does something in a certain way, it is not broken, it may be inefficient or silly, but it is the standard. Doing something else makes you non-compatible, and for a communications device, that means useless.

    11. Re:Smaller? by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Can you email pictures to all 98.5% of worlds population that doesn't have iPhones?

      Yes, if they have an email address, which generally has nothing to do with what kind of phone they have.

      Any other questions?

    12. Re:Smaller? by babyrat · · Score: 1

      I suppose you might argue that Apple couldn't make an MP3 player without a screen - I mean who would want an MP3 player that didn't display the song that was playing, or have an interface to select which song to play?

      Of course they did do exactly that.

    13. Re:Smaller? by Vegeta99 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, what about the great percentage of people who have a phone that does MMS but not email?

      Face it, not having MMS is a pretty big loss for the iPhone. MMS is a push message, email on a phone generally isn't. Plus, it doesn't require a data plan. In fact, most phones don't require a data plan.

    14. Re:Smaller? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      I know lots of my friends phone numbers but not their email addresses. Half of them don't even have email outside work anyway.

    15. Re:Smaller? by piltdownman84 · · Score: 1

      If Blackberry can do it I'm sure Apple can. The Blackberry pearl is a massive success.

    16. Re:Smaller? by mini+me · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Many providers provide an email to MMS gateway.

      But more importantly, I'm not sure when you'd want to use MMS. If I take a cool photo I want to show my friends, I will send it to Facebook. That is where photo sharing happens these days. I can always follow it up with a text message if I feel they need to have people at it right now .

      Adding MMS to the iPhone would not be a bad thing when there is nothing left to do with the platform. But there are so many other features that are much more important: Push, for example, that it is not a feature the iPhone should care about right now.

    17. Re:Smaller? by kelnos · · Score: 1

      Hell, I have a phone that claims to support MMS, but any time I've tried to send an MMS message to anyone whose phone also claims to be MMS-capable, it hasn't worked. At least Apple just said "fuck it" and the iPhone doesn't support it at all.

      --
      Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.
    18. Re:Smaller? by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 1

      Face it, not having MMS is a pretty big loss for the iPhone.

      I don't have to face it, actually. For all the phones I've owned that had MMS as a feature, I've used it exactly zero times. I personally don't care about it at all, and that's the only yardstick I'm obligated to use.

  11. Could be a legal shuffle, yes? by Lester67 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Maybe the specific, full sized iPhone is the only product that that Apple is required to carry through AT&T for 5 years?

    Maybe the release of the iPhone Nano would open the door for another wireless vendor to handle that product.

    Just thinking out loud.

    1. Re:Could be a legal shuffle, yes? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes if that was the case, Apple would be launching it on another GSM network like T-Mobile if Apple decided to go that route. But using another network would require some work by the network. Remember Apple got AT&T to implement a number of network features like visual voicemail. As for launching first in China, that's pure speculation considering the iPhone isn't in China now and there are no immediate plans so far. The analyst justifies this with saying China is a large market, but that's virtually true of any product but you don't see every company launching their gadgets in China.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  12. tag: rumorsrumorsrumors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Pure speculation. Is this a slow news day?

  13. Hmm... by XPeter · · Score: 0, Insightful

    I think we can all agree that if the iPhone was on Verizon instead of AT&T, it would be even more popular then it is now. Verizon's network is far superior to AT&T's in terms of speed, reliability and coverage.

    *sigh* I guess I will have to wait for Verizon to get a decent touch-screen phone. T Mobile has the G1...AT&AT has the iPhone...and Verizon has the drizzle. Oh, I mean the Storm*

    --
    "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has it's limits" - Albert Einstein
  14. Kids will buy anything. by darkjohnson · · Score: 1

    Not sure why they need a smaller one but if it's cheaper and market with the right angle, the kids will have to have it. I can't imagine it will have the touch screen UI so maybe it will fail. It's happened before.

  15. Economic Downturn by rolfwind · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The article speculates that an iPhone nano may be in the works due to economic downturn (although I fail to see where the great savings lie, and how such a device would be in the works just scant months after the big crash...) but if Apple comes out with it, it still doesn't address the reason I won't buy an iPhone: lock-in.

    It's been said millions of times already, but I would like to point out the prepaid market is currently booming. I'd rather spend $500 on the iPhone upfront, get an unlimited monthly data plan cheap ($30 or less) and not have a monthly talk plan - just prepay that part as I need it.

    I don't see how a slight change in hardware will change AT&T's rates which is what hurts long term more than the cost of the phone itself. I believe Apple wants to address the lowend of the market (which is does with it's iPods, although imo the shuffle is a poor attempt without any lcd/oled at all), I just don't see it being effective.

    Right now, I can go out and buy a prepaid phone for $10. It has a decent color lcd screen, actually, and probably is better/as good as a Razr in many respects (which is piss poor at anything but being a phone out of the box). Coupled with an iPod Touch - it can do about 75% of the iPhone. I won't pretend it is as good as the iPhone unless you're near wifi access at the moment.

    But still, when I look at the iPod Touch vs iPhone, I feel like I'm paying through the nose for a gps and phone chipsets added on because of ATT and adding models won't change that component.

    *(Everyone is different. ATT's plans are decent for already heavy callers, but I'm not one and there are many other people who just want mobile internet+ipod and don't care about the phone component to the point of thinning the wallet).

    1. Re:Economic Downturn by castorvx · · Score: 0

      The lock-in on the iPhone is a huge problem for many people, including myself. I've become so attached to having the iPhone web browser in my pocket everywhere I go that they have me roped.

      I think the best solution would be to have a phone that has a cheap data plan and can run as a Wifi access point simultaneously. Associate an iPod Touch with the AP and voila, and have that sweet browsing everywhere without that bullshit AT&T.

    2. Re:Economic Downturn by Macrat · · Score: 1

      I don't see how a slight change in hardware will change AT&T's rates which is what hurts long term more than the cost of the phone itself.

      Yup. If Apple wants to grow their market, they need to put pressure on ATT to lower their rates.

    3. Re:Economic Downturn by e2d2 · · Score: 1

      You're preaching to the choir here. I actually develop applications for the iPhone but inside I want Android to take off. It's more open, it's easier to code for (just my opinion, but a popular one), and even has some better features like wake an app at a specific location, iPhone does not have this. Then toss AT&T wireless into the mix and you got a nice NO THANK YOU stew.

      The real bugger is trying to make a cross platform mobile applications that reside on the client. iPhone, Android, Crackberry, Symbian, and now webOS.. Please send help!

    4. Re:Economic Downturn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The best way to think of an iPod Shuffle is not as a normal media player. It's a radio station where there are no commercials, irritating DJs or "morning shows", and where you control all of the music. I know someone who was looking for exactly that. He bought an iPhone Shuffle the day it was announced because it was perfect for him.

      I agree that AT&T largely sucks.

  16. could make sense by TRRosen · · Score: 1

    China is a huge market, but several of the iPhones features are a no no there. (GPS etc) Could it be that rather then sell an iPhone with half its functionality disabled for the chinese market, Apple has decided to make a new phone without those features just for the chinese market.

    1. Re:could make sense by Malc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah, China, don't make me laugh! Why would they launch there? The market for them isn't that big!

      • There's already big market for iPhone clones, that are much cheaper. You see them everywhere
      • There's a big market for MyPhone. Runs an illegal copy of Windows, and is more popular with my work colleagues because it's cheaper than the iPhone, runs Windows applications, and has applications that they actually like
      • Does Apple sell hardware cheaper in China? My Airport Express at Best Buy in Shanghai was 20% more expensive than in the US! Even in Shanghai where salaries are much higher than the rest of the country, our engineers didn't like spending more than RMB25 (<USD$4), just to give perspective about disposable income levels
    2. Re:could make sense by SeaFox · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, it doesn't make any sense. Because it would be much cheaper to make the original iPhone with a few features disabled or components not included than do an entire new design, testing, RF certification, ect of a new model for a single market.

    3. Re:could make sense by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      wow you almost seemed intelligent till you said you shopped at best buy.

      but seriously Apple doesn't make iPhones to sell hardware...its to get subsidies from the phone co...something it cant get now.

    4. Re:could make sense by Malc · · Score: 1

      You haven't shopped in China have you? I went there because it has a better returns policy than most places, and at least a few people on staff who speak English (some of the staff I spoke to had been over to Vanvcouver for training).

      Even then when I had an obviously broken Airport that needed to be rebooted every 15 minutes when it lost connectivity, I spent days arguing with them that it was faulty and that they should at least exchange it for another. They insisted that I either have somebody come to my house (at my expensive) to demonstrate it doesn't work, or they'd send it off for testing for a week (which surprisingly turned up no problems). None of which was convenient for somebody who had to work from home due to early morning meetings with colleagues in California before the local office was open.

      Really, one is stupid not to shop at Best Buy under the circumstances

      iPhones in the West are relatively expensive, especially considering the plan lock-ins. iPhones in China are hideously expensive (relatively), and lock-in to the China Telecom plan makes it even worse. Many Chinese like the status symbol, but the cost is ridiculous - hence my comment that China is not a good market (or at least mass market)

  17. It's all about the API by BRSloth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As someone who worked with the iPhone SDK, I can say that iPhone Nano is not going to happen anytime soon. Reason: There is no layout managers in the SDK so, if you want your button to be in the right side, you have to provide a position in pixels from the left side. If Apple build a smaller version of the screen, about 90% of all AppStore applications would not work properly. Either that or you'd have very small buttons all over the place and it'd be really hard to read anything in the screen ('cause you need to keep same aspect ratio of the "normal" iPhone.)

    1. Re:It's all about the API by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I can say that iPhone Nano is not going to happen anytime soon. Reason: There is no layout managers in the SDK so, if you want your button to be in the right side, you have to provide a position in pixels from the left side.

      Unless the number of pixels in the screen stay the same.

    2. Re:It's all about the API by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can say that iPhone Nano is not going to happen anytime soon. Reason: There is no layout managers in the SDK so, if you want your button to be in the right side, you have to provide a position in pixels from the left side.

      Unless the number of pixels in the screen stay the same.

      "Then you'd have very small buttons ... and it'd be really hard to read anything in the screen."

      Unless the screen size stayed the same.

    3. Re:It's all about the API by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup, the number of screen pixels may stay the same, and even it it doesn't it'd be trivial to have a translator that recalculates the number of pixels for the Nano screen. What does become a problem is resolution falls (ie icon design), so it'd make a lot more sense to design a Nano with the same number of screen pixels.

      Not that I'm saying I think there's a Nano in the works. The title of this submission should have been "Groundless iPhone Nano Rumour".

      If we're going to discuss that hypothetical device, then yeah, releasing in Asia would make more sense because they've got a much bigger market of people with smaller fingers. That's no joke. The normalization of computer devices across gender and racial lines has made for a lot of viable modern products that are too cramped for my big euro-male fingers. It's not a bad thing, just a fact.

    4. Re:It's all about the API by e2d2 · · Score: 1

      Yes existing apps would have to be rebuilt but so what. One could simply store a configuration that's has layout information out for each device, determine which display view to use for that device, and then do so.

      Hypothetically the application developers should've thought of this. Will the current iPhone display resolution always be standard? Probably not.

      I'm not stating anything about this vapor phone, only that developing for multiple resolutions is not new in mobile development.

    5. Re:It's all about the API by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reduce screen size, increase density, same pixel count.
      Remove GPS, camera. Reduce backlight, battery size, remove speakerphone.
      Have the case just a little bit smaller (like 25%).

      Sell to kids with small fingers or countries with smaller fingers.
      Sell at discount to full iPhone, say $129 or $149. Still a bargain for a 4GB video iPod with WiFi web browsing + AppStore. Oh - and a basic phone.

      Doesn't like a bad rumour to me. It would put severe pricing pressure on competitors and broaden the platform. By removing some geek-lust features (heck, even Bluetooth) and not marking it down too far, they wouldn't cannibalize much from the full iPhone.

    6. Re:It's all about the API by GizmoToy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think the most compelling argument for the iPhone Nano is "Who said it would provide App Store support?" A cheap iPhone Nano that is merely a cellphone + iPod would make a killing. Then there's a clear upgrade path: Get hooked on the iPod and phone integration, then step up to the full iPhone with application support when your contract's up. I don't think it would be unusual to have a basic phone (iPhone Nano) and a smartphone (iPhone) in the Apple lineup.

      Also, the official SDK specifically warns against using hard-coded pixel values to place items on the screen. They are supposed to be in relation to the actual pixel edges, for which an easy access method is provided. I doubt many people design this way, which will undoubtedly create a nightmare when the resolution is inevitably changed, but Apple did warn everyone.

    7. Re:It's all about the API by kc8apf · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Interface Builder lets you choose to specify offsets from either side for both axes (top/bottom for Y and left/right for X). Further it lets you defined resize behaviors. The only apps that will be bitten by a change in screen dimensions are those from developers who didn't bother to learn what those controls do and assumed that the screen size will just never change.

      --
      kc8apf
    8. Re:It's all about the API by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 1

      I agree, the iPod will be mostly dead in the future.
      Today people want a phone that can play music. At least that is what I am seeing when I use public transportation.
      Luckily for Apple many phones have had horrible music player interfaces(have not followed the phone market the last 2 years). Yes my Nokia had 2 gigabytes of storage, but the way to control and select music was horrible.

      So Apple will need to make a cheaper phone+ipod, if they not want to get Sony'd.

  18. New Apple "nano" device by John+Bayko · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Isn't it more likely that the manufacturing drawings, supplier rumours, etc. are for a "iPod Touch Nano" rather than a nano iPhone? That would explain the lack of reported phone testing.

    1. Re:New Apple "nano" device by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same problem, a smaller screen means none of the old apps will work.

  19. Maybe it's good marketing, just maybe. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It seems a little counter-intuitive to launch any new product that is painfully bound to be popular in any country other than the one that goes through consumer goods like it's toilet paper. Forced obsolescence is just magical in how much it wastes, like, everything in the name of fashion.

    China is likely to reverse engineer the product and sell knock-offs to the US before they're even knock-offs. People tend to believe in what they know first, at least they do in the US.

    1. Re:Maybe it's good marketing, just maybe. by Aphoxema · · Score: 1

      Oh, damn thing posting anonymously when I don't tell it to. I'm having that problem a lot lately.

      --
      "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
  20. Is this the new iPhone? by kimvette · · Score: 3, Funny
    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  21. M0D PAR3NT UP!!1! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please.

  22. Who says it'll have custom apps? by javacowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The reasoning that the iPhone Nano can't exist is that iPhone apps rely on a certain screen size and resolution.

    Well, who says the iPhone Nano won't be a device that lacks the functionality to run custom apps?

    There's a great demand by people like me who carry an iPod and cell phone who would rather carry a single device. This device would have simple requirements:

    1) Music player
    2) View and Edit Contacts
    3) View and Edit Calendars
    4) No contract
    5) No data plan/ voice plan only
    6) Sync with iTunes/Addressbook/iCal
    7) Calculator and other simple apps

    Essentially, it would be an iPod Nano would a phone attached, and it would sell like hotcakes. Apple could charge a premium over other "dumbphones" because it would be an Apple phone. It wouldn't need anymore than simple first party apps. Later on, the iPhone SDK would be updated so that third party developers could port their existing apps to it.

    The only reason Apple wouldn't do this is if, despite the flood of volume, it simply wouldn't be profitable enough.

    --
    This space left intentionally blank.
    1. Re:Who says it'll have custom apps? by GizmoToy · · Score: 1

      I think you're probably right on. Apple likes clearly-defined product groups with certain features.

      I wouldn't be surprised to see:
      iPhone Nano = iPod + Phone (Data plan not required)
      iPhone 3G (or whatever is next) = iPod + Phone + Apps (Data plan required)

      Then there's a nice upgrade path for Apple from one to the other.

    2. Re:Who says it'll have custom apps? by svnt · · Score: 1

      More importantly, who says you can't get a physically smaller LCD screen than the iPhone with the same number of pixels.

      There are several phones out now (HTC, OpenMoko) with a 2.8" 640x480 LCD. There is no reason an iPhone Nano couldn't sport a 480x320 2.2" display and have zero resolution-based issues.

  23. A lot of speculation from a peck of fact... by argent · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Despite limited information in the supplier channels and typical secrecy with new Apple products, insiders have confirmed that the iPhone nano is not yet in the testing labs at AT&T, Marshal says, leading him to believe that the launch will most likely be with a non-US carrier.

    Either that, or it's not on the way at all. :)

  24. Re:makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I believe the plural is "penii"

  25. And? by Flere+Imsaho · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't know if it's just me, but who gives a fuck? It's a phone, people. Get a life. Not trolling, just saying...

    --
    It gripped her hand gently. 'Regret is for humans,' it said.
  26. You breaking apps will stop Apple? by Kalewa · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Do you honestly think Apple would give more than a passing thought to inconveniencing programmers?

    Here's how it would go.

    Launch Day: Programmers are notified that they will have to rewrite their programs to work on the Nano. Everyone whines, bitches, moans, and claims that the Nano will fail within weeks without programmer support. A lot of them vow not to buy it or program for it.

    Fifteen minutes later: The first fart app for the Nano is ported.

    A week after launch day: Programmers of apps that make obscene amounts of money grudgingly announce that they're working on porting their apps.

    Six months after launch day: The Nano 2nd generation is announced. All apps have either been ported, or portable equivalents have been written.

    You know that's how it'll go down.

    1. Re:You breaking apps will stop Apple? by themightythor · · Score: 1

      Six months after launch day: The Nano 2nd generation is announced. All apps have either been ported, or portable equivalents have been written.

      You forgot to mention that at that time, they'll come out with the iPhone Nano v2, thus simultaneously alienating a lot of people who gushed to get the v1 and sucking cash from all those who need the latest geegaw from Apple.

    2. Re:You breaking apps will stop Apple? by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      You forgot to mention that at that time, they'll come out with the iPhone Nano v2, thus simultaneously alienating a lot of people who gushed to get the v1 and sucking cash from all those who need the latest geegaw from Apple.

      And you forgot to mention that the Slashbots will laugh at those buying either version because the next Android/OpenMoko phone will actually not suck.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  27. Re:makes sense by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

    nah, the entire country only has one. It's detachable.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  28. "Huge, heavy brick?" by Valdrax · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Because the classic iPhone is huge heavy brick that many potential customers would be embarresed lugging around. By going down a size the new iPhone nano might be the size of a mobile phone.

    I kind of stunned by this. What is the standard size for phones nowadays? My iPhone is a heck of a lot slimmer than the Nokia candy bar phone I was using up until now, and it's not much bigger than the RAZRs my family uses. I don't think I could actually reliably hit the buttons on a phone smaller than the iPhone, especially if a smaller phone were a touch screen.

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
    1. Re:"Huge, heavy brick?" by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "My iPhone is a heck of a lot slimmer than the Nokia candy bar phone I was using up until now"

      You do realize we live in a 3 dimensional world, don't you? There are two other dimensions to consider in addition to width. And here is a hint - the other two dimensions are larger than the average cell phone size.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    2. Re:"Huge, heavy brick?" by WCguru42 · · Score: 1

      I always find comments about the iPhone being too large to be quite funny. How small are your pockets anyways, got too much cash stuffed in there to fit anything else?

      --
      "Educate the mind but never at the expense of the soul."~Blessed Basil Moreau
    3. Re:"Huge, heavy brick?" by Smurf · · Score: 2

      "My iPhone is a heck of a lot slimmer than the Nokia candy bar phone I was using up until now"

      You do realize we live in a 3 dimensional world, don't you? There are two other dimensions to consider in addition to width. And here is a hint - the other two dimensions are larger than the average cell phone size.

      In a 3 dimensional world, the most important measure of size is volume:
      iPhone: 4.5" x 2.4" x 0.48" = 5.184 cu in

      On the other hand,
      Nokia 6030: 4.40" x 1.90" x 0.90" = 7.524 cu in (or 45% more than the iPhone)
      Nokia N73: 4.33" x 1.93" x 0.75" = 6.268 cu in (or 21% more)
      Nokia N78: 4.45" x 1.93" x 0.59" = 5.067 cu in (or 2.3% less)
      Nokia N82: 4.41" x 1.98" x 0.68" = 5.938 cu in (or 15% more)

      So, the iPhone is pretty much as big as the smallest candy bar Nokia that I found in a fast query.

    4. Re:"Huge, heavy brick?" by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      Not even close. I have a nokia here that's so small I keep damned losing it. They make some *really* small phones. It's about the size/height of 2 ipod shuddles end to end and about half as thick.

    5. Re:"Huge, heavy brick?" by dangitman · · Score: 1

      There are two other dimensions to consider in addition to width.

      But thickness is the least useful dimension. Making the other dimensions smaller means sacrificing screen size.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    6. Re:"Huge, heavy brick?" by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's not cash....

    7. Re:"Huge, heavy brick?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is a horrible way of looking at it. Imagine I made a phone 10 times the length of the iPhone and 0.05 times the breadth. Would it be a much better phone to carry around?

      Let's see what it would be:
      45"x0.12"x0.48" = 2.592 cu. in.
      Half the volume of the current iPhone! It _must_ be better!

      The point is, there is a certain point beyond which a phone is too big as a phone. Personally, I love the iPod Touch, it's awesome! But there's no way I'd carry something like that around as a phone. Others find it perfectly comfortable.

      My point isn't that the iPhone is wrong-sized, it's that you're using the wrong sort of judgement to determine if it is.

    8. Re:"Huge, heavy brick?" by drsquare · · Score: 1

      iPhone: 4.5" x 2.4" x 0.48" = 5.184 cu in

      It's not the depth so much as the surface area. The iPhone then is 11.25 sqin.

      My phone is 3.25" x 1.75" = 5.68 sq in, or half the size of an iphone.

    9. Re:"Huge, heavy brick?" by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

      Not even close. I have a nokia here that's so small I keep damned losing it. They make some *really* small phones. It's about the size/height of 2 ipod shuddles end to end and about half as thick.

      If it's that small, it has to be a pain in the ass to dial, most likely has crappy battery life due to the necessarily small battery, and picks up tons of ambient noise because the microphone is nowhere near where it needs to be. Why would anyone buy such a thing? I had an Ericsson T610 once (still have it, but I've not used it in years); its keypad is annoyingly small. Despite this, it's only about a half-inch shorter and narrower than my iPhone 3G. It is at least half again as thick...maybe twice as thick. That was the smallest phone I've used, and I wouldn't want to go any smaller.

      To the poster further upstream who thinks the iPhone is ill-proportioned: What are you, six years old or something? The iPhone (and devices of similar size) comfortably fits in an adult-sized hand, which is where it'll be if you're making a call, browsing websites, checking email, or whatever. I don't want a phone like the one Ben Stiller was using in Zoolander...a phone so small that you have to pinch it between your thumb and index finger to hold it up to your ear isn't my idea of "ergonomic."

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    10. Re:"Huge, heavy brick?" by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Yeah, all the cash I saved by not buying a $600 phone!

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    11. Re:"Huge, heavy brick?" by kelnos · · Score: 1

      You do realise the 8GB iPhone costs $200 now, which is comparable to or cheaper than the price of many other smartphones?

      --
      Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.
    12. Re:"Huge, heavy brick?" by kelnos · · Score: 1

      In a 3 dimensional world, the most important measure of size is volume

      No, it really isn't. My phone goes in my pocket. You may put yours in a belt-attached holster, but I don't, and I do not want to. My pockets may indeed be limited by volume, but they are also limited in each of the 3 dimensions, which must all be considered separately. Beyond that, there is also comfort. Even if an object technically fits in my pocket, it may not be comfortable to keep it there. The iPhone does not fit comfortably in my pockets, even if it may take up less space volume-wise than a phone that does.

      --
      Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.
  29. iPhone Shuffle by antdude · · Score: 1

    Already done. Watch this YouTube video. [grin] :)

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  30. iPhone = Brick? Pul-eeze... by sjbe · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Because the classic iPhone is huge heavy brick that many potential customers would be embarresed lugging around.

    Yes there are smaller phones available but I've yet to meet ANYONE who objected to the iPhone by calling it a "huge heavy brick" or that they would be embarrassed by it. Quite the opposite actually - it's something of a status symbol if anything. ANY form factor will have tradeoffs. If you don't like the ones Apple chose then shut up and buy a different phone.

    The iPhone isn't for everyone and it is ok if you don't want one. I carry a different phone myself because I travel places for work where flashing a several hundred dollar phone is a bad idea. But if you are going to object to criticize the iPhone you can find far better arguments than to call it a "huge heavy brick" which it very clearly is not. The virtual keyboard, the so-so camera, the API, the lack of a removable battery, the lack of removable storage, etc are all perfectly valid criticisms depending on what you expect out of a phone. But a "brick"? Pul-eeeze.

  31. Remember JonKatz? by raddan · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    The whole reason I got a Slashdot account was to filter him out. You can do the same with ScuttleMonkey:

    Preferences -> Index -> Authors

    Uncheck "ScuttleMonkey" and click "save".

    Enjoy.

  32. tag article ohnowjuststopit by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

    Seriously though, fluff pieces like this shouldn't appear on Slashdot. They're nothing more than attempts to inflate ad revenue. They have absolutely nothing of substance. That "article" didn't tell me a single thing. Complete waste of thee minutes of my life.

    Perhaps the ed's need an "articlenotworththeclick" tag? Then /. can get its ad-revenue, but it saves you rewarding the other site. Anyone really keen on reading about the topic must be new^H^H^H will know to ctrl-f "better link" to see anyone suggests one.

    --
    Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
  33. Fat fingers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think Americans could handle the iPhone nano. I fat finger my regular iPhone enough as it is. Asians are much better suited with finger size and finger dexterity for this type of technology.

  34. ads? on /.? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what ads?;-);-);-)

    1. Re:ads? on /.? by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      Hear, hear,
      Adblock for the win !

  35. Counterfeit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If it appears in China first, it's counterfeit.

    Apple's trademarks are:
    - Non-removable battery
    - Non-removable storage
    - Single SIM card on iPhones
    - Proprietary connector on phone/iPod side.

    Counterfeits have:
    -Removable batteries
    -Removable storage
    -Dual SIM
    -Usually triband-GSM instead of QuadbandGSM+UMTS
    -mini-usb connectors
    -Poor performace, poor battery life
    -Hacked copies of software on the phone, could be iPhone OS, could be Hacked Symbian, could be Hacked Windows Mobile
    -Invalid or stolen IMEI number

    And this is information acquired from people who work in the mobile phone industry. Terrorists are fond of the Chinese counterfeits because they can't be traced. (They all have the same IMEI number apparently.)

  36. Article Data Seriously Misconstrued! by altek · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The whole basis for this "speculation" (the mobile device world already seems to have moved on from this rumor) was a mock-up of a rubber skin for an iPhone nano device from a chinese supplier that makes rubber device skins.

    Likely due to all the knock-off companies in China making knock-off devices, one probably has a mini iPhone knockoff in the works.

    It was all over engadget, et al, like a month ago. (and this is /. so naturally i'm too lazy to go dig up links)

    --
    THE MAGIC WORDS ARE SQUEAMISH OSSIFRAGE
    1. Re:Article Data Seriously Misconstrued! by jamshid · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the iphone nano is the bigfoot of the gadget world -- anyone who says it exists is an idiot or a con man. And even though everyone knows it doesn't exist, somehow evidence of it becomes a media sensation periodically. Wasn't the last bigfoot hoax also just a rubber suit?

  37. damn by xushi · · Score: 0

    Damn.. and i just bought my iPhone 3G 16G .....

  38. Mactini Nano by permaculture · · Score: 1

    Looks as promising as the Mactini Nano!

    http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=noe3kR8KqJc

    --
    Environmentalism is the new Victorianism. Everyone ties on a green corset and pretends we're virtuous.
  39. Already launched in the us by He+who+knows · · Score: 1

    there are already fakes flogged to fan boys who do not know it isn't genuine.

  40. Is it like iPod Nano? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    iPod NoNo had 2 controls, play and volume, and only played music on shuffle, if memory serves.

    So. . . the iPhone OhNo will have 1 button and call random people on your phone list?

    I can see Stevo really playing that up as a new form of social networking.