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."

32 of 177 comments (clear)

  1. 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 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).
    2. 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
    3. 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.
    4. 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."
    5. 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
    6. 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.

  2. 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 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.

  3. 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?

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

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

    Can we just get rid of him?

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

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

  7. 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 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.

  8. 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 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.

  9. 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.
  10. 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 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.

    3. 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
  11. 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.

  12. 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
  13. 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.
  14. Re:iPhone Shito by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 4, Funny

    iDon't

    --
    "But this one goes to 11!"