Most cell phone users are under some form of contractual obligation these days, and two years seems to be a common committment. Allowing 6 months for actual delivery, plus maybe another 6 months for them to work out the first generation bugs... by the time a year runs by a large portion of the users out there will have had the opportunity to make contract choices which allow them to make the jump to the iPhone without additional penalty, if they choose.

MacWorld was the perfect timing for this announcement. It enjoyed more press coverage, both domestic and international, than a special Apple press event would have. That amplified the excitement worldwide.

Plus, CES handed Apple a big bonus: They scheduled their show this year to coincide with MacWorld. The iPhone announcement eclipsed anything coming out of CES, so all the buzz was around Apple and nobody cared what was announced at CES.

Apple could not have gotten nearly as much bang for the buck had they waited. And as Jobs said, it is better that Apple announce it on their own terms, rather than let the FCC do it for them.

It was crazy alright: Crazy like a fox.

Oh, and one more thing: It’ll take the competition a lot longer than six months to catch up to the iPhone.

Some will underestimate the threat the iPhone presents to them and squander their time, while the others are too busy quivering to do anything.

Apple spent years developing the iPhone, and while the copycats have the advantage of following a path already blazed, they’ll also have to worry about avoiding the patent landminds Apple left along the trail.

There's one simple thing - it's the best iTunes phone available, and for a lot of people who already have their music library in iTunes, that's going to be a major determining factor between the iPhone and, say, a Sony Walkman phone.

And yeah, the choice was between announcing it, or going for FCC and being unable to control security beyond that point. (Love to see the FCC agree to sign an Apple NDA).

These days, I can't read an article (i.e. the computerworld article linked in this editorial) that is so biased against Apple without thinking of how weasily John C. Dvorak is when it comes to writing about the Mac.
See for yourself in his own words. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4215587585970919950&q=troll

You have to figure.. if you write negatively about Apple these days, people are amazed. They want to see it.. weather they are fans of Apple or loath the company. They just want to read it. (I do too... but to look for objectivity and truth.. which is there sometimes.)

I was considering upgrading to a video iPod from a 3G iPod. There is no doubt I will wait now, especially since I am already a Cingular customer.

I do believe that I'm not the only guy in the world who void at all cost carrying a Mobile phone. I have succeeded to the extend that the one I must carrying actually belong to my employer and my average monthly usage round 60 to 70 min.

Said that; I'm in smitten with Apple iPhone but not to the point to sign in 2 year Cingular's service.

I'll wait for Apple to release an iPod Widescreen, base on OS X too with tunes and internet apps load up but no phone features.. Can't wait for Skype for "iPod Widescreen" Yeah man... this is it!!!

In recent years at least, Macworld and CES have always shared a calendar week...

Quote

Guest wrote:
I do believe that I'm not the only guy in the world who void at all cost carrying a Mobile phone..

I didn't want one, but my wife and did and when we went to purchase it they had a two for offer so I also got one. I use my phone a lot, she rarely uses hers. My use is mostly business, though I use it during off peak times to keep in touch with kith and kin.

Anyway, I may wait a while, but the iPhone looks real tempting from a user friendly point of view. Backing up and syncing my phone's address book is a real chore, I have gotten to the point of just doing double entry, one in the phone, one in Address Book on my Mac. With the iPhone it looks to be as easy as my syncing my stuff to .mac. Not having to carry an iPod as well as a phone is a plus.

If they didn't unveil the iPhone, the keynote would have been 20 minutes long and covered just the AppleTV. And then we'd be hand-wringing over whether the competition would catch up in the month before Apple ships it.

so early. I am interested in it, but just got a Treo 650 from a relative, so it'll be awhile before I'm ready to get an iPhone, and 8 GB of storage is not enough to interest me.

Also, I want to see what third-party apps and user app/widget development will become available. I'm already with Cingular/AT&T with my Treo... Maybe by the time we have a 32+ GB iPhone, I'll be ready.

Announcing it now gets people excited, and when June hits it'll be everywhere.

Remember the intel switch that was announced and supposed to take a full year? If I recall it only took 7 mos. We may see this phone a little sooner than expected, and Apple can announce that it arrived way ahead of schedule. How long will FCC approval take? This has been in the works for over 2 1/2 years, I bet it's ready now.

In my experience, the FCC doesn't hear about your product until your test lab tells them. Therefore, you make the test lab sign the NDA (yes, they do it ALL the time) do the testing, make sure you're in compliance and then when you're close to shipping, you get an FCC ID. The test lab submits the paperwork and off you go.

That FCC testing excuse was nonsense. Did you hear about the Razor before Moto was shipping?

No, I think Apple had other reasons for announcing early. I like many of the reasons stated above. They just wanted the appearence of being consistent...

One reason totally ignored here is that cell phone users have contracts. By giving potential costumers the heads up 6 months in advance, people who otherwise sign onto a contract may wait so they get an iPhone.

Quote

Rainy Day wrote:
Oh, and one more thing: It’ll take the competition a lot longer than six months to catch up to the iPhone.

Some will underestimate the threat the iPhone presents to them and squander their time, while the others are too busy quivering to do anything.

Apple spent years developing the iPhone, and while the copycats have the advantage of following a path already blazed, they’ll also have to worry about avoiding the patent landminds Apple left along the trail.

LG KE850
http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2007/01/11/iphone-and-lg-ke850-separated-at-birth/

It looks to me like Apple is playing catch-up.

There's a big difference between the two. You can pronounce iPhone - it's easy: eye-fone. Done. Next...
el-ge-ke-850. Much harder to say. Not catchy at all.

It'll fail - just you wait and see.

You say that you think Apple is playing catch-up - can you substantiate that?

I love the idea of ctopher, FCC testing as a reason is nonsense. I feel it's all about Microsoft.

Who is talking about the iPod-killer Zune anymore? Its big USP was wireless exchange of music with other Zunes. You remember that useless feature. The answer from Apple? First: Steve Inc. prepared an iPod line extension with the killer application wireless phone. Second: Selling 21 Million iPods in the last quarter Apple makes the best Microsoft engineers working on Zune look like high school boys.

That's very important for the upcoming deals with Hollywood. Apple has to appear as the one and only partner. After the last earnings and the presentation of the "true" video iPod as a Phone and the deal with the "new" AT&T on networking, the game is over. The moguls have to go with iTunes.

Apple is going to dominate Microsoft. Remember Jobs quoting Alan Kay: "People who are really serious about software, should make their own hardware." That's the message for Redmond.

Can you say "Pra - da?"

Cause that's what's going to be on the "el-ge-ke-850" instead of "LG K850"

Quote

LaurieF wrote:
There's a big difference between the two. You can pronounce iPhone - it's easy: eye-fone. Done. Next...
el-ge-ke-850. Much harder to say. Not catchy at all.

It'll fail - just you wait and see.

You say that you think Apple is playing catch-up - can you substantiate that?

Not a mistake. First, Apple knew its stock would have taken a major hit if it did not release news of the item. Second, as others have pointed out, it received tons of free publicity. Third, Apple knew it had to get the whole "iPhone" trademark with Cisco settled before the product shipped. It could not do that secretly, through the courts anyway. Fourth, now people have seen the iPhone, can ask questions, and Apple can respond to user feedback, thus improving the final device.

As far as cannalbilizing iPod sales, I doubt it. First, the Shuffle and Nano are in a completely different price market. In addition, Apple can update the high end Pod at any time, which by the way is still significantly cheaper then the iPhone.

For all we know, Apple intentionally priced the device high to not compete with its other products, knowing it would actually sell the iPhone cheaper.

By announcing the iPhone six months before it starts shipping, Apple has given six months worth of cell phone buyers a reason to hold off on replacing their phones.

While I know have a dozen Apple fans who, like me, have been delaying the inevitable phone replacement to see what the company would announce, most of the public had no idea Apple had this in the works. Now they do. And now, many more consumers will wait to see just how good the iPhone is before they sign a new contract. I'd venture to guess, in fact, that cell phone sales will be measurably reduced for the next six months as a result. By the time the iPhone is easily available, pent-up demand will make it the hottest thing in the market. That "buzz" will generate even more publicity, and the cycle will continue.

A pretty good PR and marketing plan, if you ask me.

Quote

Guest wrote:
so early. I am interested in it, but just got a Treo 650 from a relative, so it'll be awhile before I'm ready to get an iPhone, and 8 GB of storage is not enough to interest me.

Oh, and the 23 MB in the Treo is enough? Even with an SD card, it can store only 2GB. (I expect that the Treos cannot use the newer SDHC--high capacity--cards.)

Quote

ctopher wrote:
In my experience, the FCC doesn't hear about your product until your test lab tells them. Therefore, you make the test lab sign the NDA (yes, they do it ALL the time) do the testing, make sure you're in compliance and then when you're close to shipping, you get an FCC ID. The test lab submits the paperwork and off you go.

That FCC testing excuse was nonsense. Did you hear about the Razor before Moto was shipping?

No, I think Apple had other reasons for announcing early. I like many of the reasons stated above. They just wanted the appearence of being consistent...

NDAs mean diddly-squat, as recent events have shown. All it would take would be some employee of the lab leaking the information to the press for, oh, $50K. (Heck, Apple can't even be sure about its own employees.) The fact that Apple could sue the lab (and, perhaps, the leaking employees) is irrelevant. Once leaked, the damage would be done.

As for the Razr, it was not a revolutionary device, but a small incremental change. According to Mobile Review, "What is the peculiarity of the new phone from Motorola? It’s very simple to answer. The developers had a task to create the thinnest clamshell phone on the market as soon as possible." That's it. Not revolutionary, at all--it's just an ordinary high-end phone that is very thin. The fact that it was considered "new" is a testament to how bogged down the design of cell phones had become. Tiny tweaks were being breathlessly heralded as the "next great thing."

I think they announced early so people will not renew their cell phone contracts, since they are all waiting eagerly for an iPhone. When you don't know when an iPhone will come out, you have to get on with life. (My wife just signed a 2 year contract to swap her phone out, darn it!). But if you know the latest date it might be, you can probably wait that long. It's worth the anticipation.

Quote

gslusher wrote:

Quote

Guest wrote:
so early. I am interested in it, but just got a Treo 650 from a relative, so it'll be awhile before I'm ready to get an iPhone, and 8 GB of storage is not enough to interest me.

Oh, and the 23 MB in the Treo is enough? Even with an SD card, it can store only 2GB. (I expect that the Treos cannot use the newer SDHC--high capacity--cards.)

New Treos can use the SDHC. The 650 can with a widely known hack.

Saying that 8gb of storage wasn't enough to interest you in the context of a Treo was very silly, however. Had it been said in the context of being able to get 30/60/80gb iPods, that might have been compelling. But compared to the Treo?

A Treo might have a lot of programs available, but it also suffers from the problem that S. Jobs has talked about: a lot of those programs can cause instability.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Can you say Prada

Isn't that what the devil wears?

I was considering getting a Treo for the phone and email features, but I will wait until the iPhone settles in and see if other cell services come on board.

Quote

luomat wrote:
New Treos can use the SDHC. The 650 can with a widely known hack.

That's good to know. It would bring the Treo's storage to 4 GB or maybe 8GB--I've seen a few 8 GB SDHC cards. (The camera I want to get can use SDHC.) Howevr, they're very expensive. In comparing the prices of a new Treo, Que, etc., one needs to add in the storage card. A 4 GB card can run $40 - $80 for the "normal" speed, much more ($130 for SanDisk, for example) for the higher speed cards, which are really necessary if you want to take video. There are a lot of "off" brands of cards, but I generally avoid them in favor of a well-respected brand like SanDisk. I have a SanDisk Ultra II 1 GB card in my Palm TX and use Ultra II or Extreme III for my Canon Optura 50 camcorder. (It can record stills or video on the card.)

Daniel Eran in his Roughly Drafted magazine blog compares the two in a thoughtful and analytical way. Google him.

John

Quote

ctopher wrote:
In my experience, the FCC doesn't hear about your product until your test lab tells them. Therefore, you make the test lab sign the NDA (yes, they do it ALL the time) do the testing, make sure you're in compliance and then when you're close to shipping, you get an FCC ID. The test lab submits the paperwork and off you go.

That FCC testing excuse was nonsense. Did you hear about the Razor before Moto was shipping?

No, I think Apple had other reasons for announcing early. I like many of the reasons stated above. They just wanted the appearence of being consistent...

Sorry, but this is not true. Once the FCC tests are underway and approval is imminent, the FCC publishes photos of the units (internal and external), letters from the applying company, and technical specifications of the unit being approved. This information is put up on the FCC website for the whole world to see. There is no "NDA" for licensing from a public government agency.

MANY people knew about the RAZR before its release. Knew what it looked like, what features it had, etc. This little-known avenue for pre-release information is the lifeblood of sites such as Phonescoop.com and Smartphonethoughts.com. Yes, smartphone enthusiasts and cell-phone nerds have their sites, blogs, and forums JUST like the rest of us. Jobs was very smart to do EXACTLY what he did. His presentation of the iPhone is MUCH sexier than what the FCC's site will show.

i agree with the sentiment that the six months lead is meant to give customers a chance to get their business in order before making the switch... most people have less than a year on their contracts, and by the time this rolls out, CONSIDERABLY more people will have made a decision regarding their contracts and weather to make the shift.

also, that LG smart phone is a piece of dung, have you ever navigated the UI on one of those things? ick...

the FCC factor is true as well, the FCC would have dropped the details before release, leaving apple [jobs] with much less hullabaloo to drive a successful launch. to alleviate that, they drop the whole announce-it-and-pick-it-up-on-your-way-out method they have been doing with the recent new products... it's all PR, after all...

There is one major issue there: the Treo was FREE.

Previously I had a Treo 600 (that was my brother's castoff, also free, but very buggy.

Quote

gslusher wrote:
Oh, and the 23 MB in the Treo is enough? Even with an SD card, it can store only 2GB. (I expect that the Treos cannot use the newer SDHC--high capacity--cards.)

One possible reason that Apple announced the iPhone months before its release is to allow criticism and debate rgarding its feature set and implementation, criticism and debate that it can use creatively to affect the version that will be offered for sale.

On the other hand, MacWorld was extremely disappointing to those who use Macintosh computers professionally, since there was no mention of Leopard, no demonstration of new hardware and no announcements of significant updates for pro applications. For example, in recent weeks and months other manufacturers of Digital Audio Workstation software have announced major updates, while Apple's entry, Logic Pro has not undergone any major revision for quite a while. My guess is that Apple wants to release Leopard, 64bit versions of its Pro applications and new and more powerful desktop machines simultaneously - - perhaps in April. The reason for Apple's lowered guidance for the present quarter and for the slight decline in desktop sales is probably that Adobe's Intel native version CS3 will not be released until April - - which means that there is no speed advantage for Photoshop users (15% of he Mac market) in purchasing even the most powerful MacPro desktop at the present time.

1- early previews seem to be a good way for Apple to pick up on what people like and don't like about what they see. iTV didn't have a hard drive in September, appleTV has one now. Did Apple listen into the after hype buzz about the iTV and act accordingly? Apple has shown they are consumer minded in their design.
2- All good 'magic' acts are showing you what they want you to see, while the trick is going on without you noticing. Misdirection. It seems like Apple's best way to keep it's tech secrets closed from competitors, is to put on a really good show. Now they can get FCC approval, their competitors are scrambling to make something half as cool as an iPhone and Apple will still do 'one more thing' on the release day. One more thing is never limited to the Stevenote. The most underrated, coolest thing about the iPhone, I think, it's that it's software oriented. Yeah, they've made a piece of spectacular hardware to run it on, but it's all in the code.

It's not silly if I'm going to use the iPhone as my iPod, when I have 20+ GB of music and audiobooks, and CDs I haven't ripped yet. I don't want to carry too many devices - I currently carry my MacBook, my Treo and sometimes my old iBook (which serves as my iPod ). When I get an iPhone I want to replace the Treo and not need to buy an iPod.

To me the ideal situation is to have an iPhone that is as powerful as the MacBook, so I don't have to carry a computer around, and it can be my only computer if there's enough horsepower and storage. No time soon, I'm sure, but one day we won't be using Macs, phones and iPods, but one device for everything.

And yes, instability is a major issue on every Palm device I've owned. My old Palm IIIxe is the most stable and reliable one I've used, but I'm done with monochrome.

Quote

luomat wrote:
Saying that 8gb of storage wasn't enough to interest you in the context of a Treo was very silly, however. Had it been said in the context of being able to get 30/60/80gb iPods, that might have been compelling. But compared to the Treo?

A Treo might have a lot of programs available, but it also suffers from the problem that S. Jobs has talked about: a lot of those programs can cause instability.

My wife uses a crack berry and she was tickled w/ the iPhone. We have been Cingulat/AT&T customers for years and have a good relationship with the manger of the local COngular/AT&T store. He is creating a list of customers who want an iPhone so he will order enough. Also, those on the list get first shot, and we are on the list. No more cludgy UI for my wife! I agree with the other posters who have said the extra time will give Apple time to add features and be damn sure it works like a Apple product should!

Given the fact that every analyst around was basing their stock price projections on what was announced at MacWorld, and that all the rumors seemed to be pointing to the inevitability of a "iPhone", would it be a good thing for shareholders if Jobs held the announcement? Think of the deflation of the stock price if Jobs talked about Apple TV, but had no new product to show? Leopard isn't out, there's no new iLife announced, Apple TV isn't setting the world on fire. They pretty much HAD to bring out the iPhone this time to keep the stock price afloat.

Everything iPhone does, Prada does better, and first.

http://www.myiphone.com/onyx-concept-phone-gives-birth-to-twins-iphone-and-lg-ke850-17234.php

Quote

Actual Reality wrote:
i agree with the sentiment that the six months lead is meant to give customers a chance to get their business in order before making the switch... most people have less than a year on their contracts, and by the time this rolls out, CONSIDERABLY more people will have made a decision regarding their contracts and weather to make the shift.

also, that LG smart phone is a piece of dung, have you ever navigated the UI on one of those things? ick...

the FCC factor is true as well, the FCC would have dropped the details before release, leaving apple [jobs] with much less hullabaloo to drive a successful launch. to alleviate that, they drop the whole announce-it-and-pick-it-up-on-your-way-out method they have been doing with the recent new products... it's all PR, after all...

Unfortunately for Apple, their iPhone (if it can even be called that) is not a "pain free" device. If anyone tries to use the data network their first experience and each there after will be painfully slow. Or when their battery runs low while they are away from a power source, they will surely feel the pain of Apple's stranglehold on the battery (you can't swap it out for a fresh one). Or if one tries to use the phone with their work email they won't be able to view some of the most common business attachments in the country (even in non-Microsoft shops Word & Excel documents are common). Of course if Apple would let third parties develop for their products, someone would most assuredly build an application to support viewing these files. Apple, however, does not believe in the freedom of the consumer. The Apple phone will be a closed environment for which third party applications will not be allowed or supported. I thought they would have learned after they lost so big on the PC side.

But perhaps the most painful experience of Apple's phone for the consumer will simply be buying one. Apple's phone comes with more than double the standard markup in price.

"According to a report from iSuppli, Apple's iPhone supposedly will have 50 percent gross margins. Apple's executives have declined to comment on the speculation. iSuppli pegs the BOM at $229.85 for the 4GB version of the phone and at $264.85 for the 8GB phone. Total expenses for the 4GB and 8GB models are $245.83 and $280.83, respectively. That makes the $499 4GB model more profitable with a 49.3 percent margin and the $599 8GB model profitable at 46.9 percent in the margins. While these margins are spot on for other iPod products, like the Nano and iMacs, most high-end phones have about 20 percent margins."

This device suffers from an identity crisis. If the goal was to design the ultimate phone, Apple failed miserably. If their goal was to build the ultimate iPod, they did even worse. I'd like to see the whole phone thing pulled out of this iPod, and the capacity of the device exploded. Then this would be a compelling device. Alternatively, they could keep the capacity the same, and put real data network capabilities in there and provide me with a way to swap batteries on the go.

Apple loyalists will still buy the phone. Once you're used to buying overpriced hardware with deficient capabilities, as long as it looks pretty you'll buy the Apple phone. For me, it's just not a viable option due to the substantial drawbacks highlighted above. I'm especially disappointed about the closed environment and the inability to use a spare battery.

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
It's not silly if I'm going to use the iPhone as my iPod, when I have 20+ GB of music and audiobooks, and CDs I haven't ripped yet. I don't want to carry too many devices - I currently carry my MacBook, my Treo and sometimes my old iBook (which serves as my iPod ). When I get an iPhone I want to replace the Treo and not need to buy an iPod.

Do you want to carry all that music and audiobooks around all the time? 20 GB is something like 14 days of continuous music (more for audiobooks). Most people don't have that need. Thus, the 4GB Nano is the most popular iPod. (Please don't try to correct me by citing Amazon's list, as they consider each color to be a separate product. Add the colors together.)

My iTunes library is about as large as yours--21 GB, including about 6 GB of videos. I have a 30 GB iPod 5.5G so that I can play the videos. (It beats carrying a DVD player.) Otherwise, I'd have a Nano.

I went to a Cingular store yesterday to ask about the iPhone, and they said that it would actually be coming in March, not in June as previously announced!!

Needless to say I replaced my dying TDMA phone with the cheapest and worst GSM phone available, since it's going to be replaced by the iPhone as soon as humanly possible.

OK, so the iPod has a non-user-replaceable battery, right?

But I can buy a replacement battery and instructions at Fry's for $10.

Or if I don't want to open it up, I can have Apple replace the battery for $60, or use any number of (cheaper) local iPod battery replacement services (e.g I can walk next door to We-Fix-Macs and they'll install that $10 battery from Fry's.)

Do you think that the many battery vendors and battery replacement services which support the iPod are going to boycott the iPhone because it makes phone calls? Do you think Apple is going to limit its battery replacement service to "old iPods only?"

If the iPod's battery is a non-issue for the millions of iPod users, why is the new iPod (iPhone) going to be a non-starter because of the same battery issue?

Quote

JimB12 wrote:
I'm especially disappointed about the closed environment and the inability to use a spare battery.

We don't know for sure, but, as the Apple phone uses the iPod dock connector, it may be possible to use the various third-party external batteries and chargers with it. There is some indirect evidence for this in that Belkin already has a page for Apple phone accessories that includes their iPod chargers. They don't include their dock connector FM transmitters, yet--they may not have enough information on the phone. Griffin has a similar page. They also show some of their dock connector audio systems, but at least two of those have auxillary 3.5mm inputs. The Apple phone is the same width as and just slightly thicker (0.46 in vs 0.43 in) than the 30 GB iPod. It is a bit taller (4.5 vs 4.1 inch), so it might fit OK on speaker systems where the iPod is not restricted in height.

If you're not familiar with the batteries, here are a few links:

- Macally has two: one puts out 1200 mA, the other puts out 1000 mA but lasts longer. These are rechargeable from a computer or charger with a USB port, self-contained, and have a USB output jack. I have the latter and use it with my iPod (especially when using the Belkin TuneTalk voice recorder), Samsung cell phone and Palm TX.

- Griffin has the TuneJuice 2, which uses AAA batteries. They don't show this for the Apple phone, yet. They may not know the current requirements. They say that it will not recharge the iPod, but will extend its playing time.

These may not be particularly convenient to use on a regular basis, but they make good backups.

FWIW, I know several people who use Treos. None has a second battery, as they don't talk for 4 hours/day. Someone who does talk that much should have a phone with a removable battery.

First, the iPod's battery wasn't a non-issue. If you remember, there was even a graffiti campaign in NY where people spray painted the fact that iPod battery's lose significant life after 18 months and that Apple wouldn't replace the battery. Apple's support at the time suggested you buy a new iPod. The backlash was so severe that Apple obviously now offers a battery replacement service. Perhaps Apple will realize how horrible a phone without a user replacable battery is, and will redesign their phone to have this in the next revision.

Second and more importantly, the battery issue in a phone is not the same in a music player. People do not rely on a music player for safety. If your charge dies in the middle of an emergency phone call, you need to be able to swap out the battery for one that is holding enough charge to complete the call. This is why the non-user replacable battery is a non-starter with Apple's phone. Even if people started selling replacement batteries, Apple tries to make it difficult to replace. You cannot simply press a button and put a new one in. It requires tools to crack open the case. This is simply unacceptable for anyone who expects to use a phone to make a call in a time-sensitive situation, be it a life threatening situation or not. Carrying a separate battery pack with special connectors is a stop-gap, but not a real solution. Doesn't that defeat the purpose of a unified device? Carrying a pack with more wires & connectors is clunky when the rest of the phones on the planet allow you to carry a spare battery the size of a pack of matches which easily disappears into your pocket.

FWIW, most Treo users didn't buy them with intention of listening to music on the device. It's not an MP3 player with a bad PDA and bad phone built in. It's a great PDA phone with mp3 playing capabilities. If your intention is to carry around an iPod phone, you can see how easy it would be to run out of juice, especially after the capacity of the battery diminishes 20% in the first year as lithium-ion batteries do even when they treated the best they can be.

Quote

JimB12 wrote:
First, the iPod's battery wasn't a non-issue. If you remember, there was even a graffiti campaign in NY where people spray painted the fact that iPod battery's lose significant life after 18 months and that Apple wouldn't replace the battery. Apple's support at the time suggested you buy a new iPod. The backlash was so severe that Apple obviously now offers a battery replacement service.

I do remember that, actually...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BK3uUfMWy6I

Even beyond Apple's devious tactics at scraping money from my pockets on an already overpriced product, the iPod battery is an issue among the many millions of people who buy a different player instead. That's one of the main factors that drive people to producers like Sony or Cowon instead of Apple.

"There is no doubt that once the iPhone starts to sell like hot cakes that Apple will continue to bring out enticing iPods with 120 GB drives and a touch screen display for, perhaps, $200."

Apple will not be bringing out a touch screen iPod with 120 gig hard drive for 200 bucks, not in this decade. Are you saying that their phone will never sell like hot cakes? You can't even get a an iPod with a non-touch screen with 25% that capacity for $200! It's 250! $350 for 80 gigs and no touch screen. Give me a break. Will this guy ever be unbiased will he just piss Apple's kool-aid out and call it an "article"?

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
…the iPod battery is an issue among the many millions of people who buy a different player instead. That's one of the main factors that drive people to producers like Sony or Cowon instead of Apple.

Which is why their products have the majority of the market.

Quote

LaurieF wrote:

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
…the iPod battery is an issue among the many millions of people who buy a different player instead. That's one of the main factors that drive people to producers like Sony or Cowon instead of Apple.

Which is why their products have the majority of the market.

So you love Windows do you? Nobody takes issue with some element of Windows! What a terrible, reactionary argument. They are a majority of the market because of the aggressive advertising, well integrated content solution, and ease of use for novices. They are not the majority of the market due to their better battery. Ask people why they bought a DAP that is not an iPod and you'll likely get one of three answers: I don't like iTunes controlling my music on my player, I wanted better battery performance, or I wanted XYZ feature that the iPod lacks. Seriously, if you want to try to argue a point, do it, but don't just be a name-calling reactionary. I just made your point better than you did by pointing out the things Apple has done well. Yours was purely a snide remark, but macheads never do that.

Outside of the touch screen, allowing multiple touches on the screen is new in PDAs, but it's been around for awhile and it was a matter of time until it got shrunk down to a PDA. Outside of the screen, the basically just took the iPod and slapped a really bad phone in it. Sure it runs a slim version of Mac OS X, but if I can't install anything, the OS doesn't really matter. I dunno, it looks nice, and the screen is nice, but I can't see this being worth the money.

I think not being able to install software is a good thing, not bad. I remember thinking that when phones came out a few years ago with Windows CE on them, the last phone I would want would be one of those. I don't know what viruses have been written for WIndows-based phones (I think the majority, like all the Apple ones! are proof-of-concept or restricted in spreadability), but the platform has to theoretically have one of the best vectors around.

Keeping the operating system locked down with Apple's controlling it as they always have done will make the likelihood of catching and spreading viruses much, much less.

I'm glad to see someone is happy to be unable to customize their phone to their specific use. I on the other hand, would continue to use a qualcomm QCP-2700 if I didn't want to catch a virus. Much safer than any stripped down and crippled operating system Apple could put together.

Quote

LaurieF wrote:
I think not being able to install software is a good thing, not bad. I remember thinking that when phones came out a few years ago with Windows CE on them, the last phone I would want would be one of those. I don't know what viruses have been written for WIndows-based phones (I think the majority, like all the Apple ones! are proof-of-concept or restricted in spreadability), but the platform has to theoretically have one of the best vectors around.

Keeping the operating system locked down with Apple's controlling it as they always have done will make the likelihood of catching and spreading viruses much, much less.