The iPhone 5 and the 3 i’s: innovative, integrative and imitative

| Ted Landau's User Friendly View

Since January 2007, when Apple first unveiled the iPhone, I've covered close to two dozen Apple media events. Yesterday, it was the iPhone 5's turn to step up to the plate.

iPhone 5

Perhaps it's a symptom of my age, but I'm showing signs of Apple announcement fatigue. No matter what Apple announces, it's becoming harder and harder for me to conjure up enthusiasm. As Yogi Berra said, "It's déjà vu all over again."

Even the articles covering yesterday's announcements have a sameness to them. Inevitably, there are pundits lamenting about how underwhelmed or (the word-that-can-not-be written) "disap-xxxx-ted" they were with the iPhone 5. In response, there are the journalists who counter that the new iPhone significantly advances what was already the best smartphone on the market — and how customers will buy a gazillion of them, proving the critics wrong. Take out the number "5" and substitute "4S" — and the columns would be indistinguishable from what was written last year.

As for me, I plan to buy an iPhone 5 (as much for business reasons as personal use). But I don't feel the eagerness and urgency to do so that I have had in the past. There is no single feature or two, such as Retina display or Siri, that has managed to capture my imagination and attention.

To be clear, I have not yet had the chance to physically hold an iPhone 5. So my impressions are all based on what I saw at the Apple event and on Apple's online PR. This admittedly limits my judgment, which may change significantly (for better or worse) in a week or so. Also, my evaluation doesn't consider any features of iOS 6 that also run on an iPhone 4S, as I don't need to upgrade to an iPhone 5 to get these features.

To crystallize my reaction, I found it helpful to group the new features of the iPhone 5 into three categories: innovative, integrative or imitative. Actually, for the middle term, "incremental" would be more accurate than "integrative," but the latter fits better with the sound of the other two terms.


This category includes items that truly qualify for the adjective "new." Ideally, they should be unmatched by anything available in competing products. Here are my top four:

Touch display. For me, the biggest technological innovation in the iPhone 5 is one that you can't directly see: the "integrated touch technology" of the Retina display. As Apple states: "Instead of a separate layer of touch electrodes between display pixels, the pixels do double duty — acting as touch-sensing electrodes while displaying the image at the same time. With one less layer between you and what you see on iPhone 5, you experience more clarity than ever before."

Lightning connector. This new connector and matching cable replaces the old 30-pin dock. While it has the advantage of being smaller and supporting a reversible plug-in, this is not a great advance by itself. However, by allowing the iPhone to be lighter, thinner and potentially hold more internal hardware components, it is significant.

On the downside, I'm not looking forward to buying a bunch of adapters (that are more expensive than the Lightning cable itself!). I also wish it was USB 3, instead of USB 2.

EarPods. Apple claims these new audio peripherals were three years in development. If they just stay in my ear reliably, they will be a big improvement over the old ones. Dave Hamilton, who got to try them out, informs me that they are not any better than the old earbuds in noisy environments. For truly isolated sound, you want ones that create a seal in your ear. But that's by design. Isolated sound is not the function of the EarPods.

Every smartphone comes with something to stick in your ears; still, I believe the EarPods qualify as an innovative change for the iPhone.

Video/Still photography. While most of the improvements to the iPhone's camera are incremental, the ability to take still photos at the same time you are recording video is new and a welcome innovation. [Update 9/14: As I am now aware, this feature has already been available on certain Android phones.]


Most of what's considered new about the iPhone 5 falls into this broad middle category. These are improvements that incrementally build upon the already existing features of the iPhone 4S. There are too many for me to list them all here. The three that most caught my attention are:

4" screen. Of course. This is the most immediately obvious change in the iPhone 5. I'm probably in a minority, but I have been more than satisfied with a 3.5" screen. I wasn't clamoring for a bigger one. Still, if the larger display provides expanded real estate without making the phone feel too bulky, I'll welcome it.

Actually, I might prefer if Apple offered multiple display sizes in its latest iPhone hardware, rather than a "one size fits all" approach (just as you can get different display sizes for MacBooks and iMacs). Perhaps that will happen someday, if Apple sees a demand for the option. But not today.

LTE. I'm excited about this one, assuming I can get a workable LTE connection in most locations where I travel. If so, it should dramatically increase the speed with which webpages load and other Internet-based apps work. I look forward to the day when I depend on 3G about as much as I now depend on EDGE.

A6 processor. The new A6 processor offers greater speed than its A5 predecessor. This means that just about everything should run faster than it did before. But the true importance of greater speed is that it potentially allows you to do things that were previously impossible. At some point, speed crosses a solid line — like the first time computers became fast enough to allow video. It remains to be seen what lines may be crossed with the A6, but game enhancements are one likely area.


By imitative, I mean features that are a direct response to innovations that first appeared on competing smartphones.

I suppose one could put the increased display size or LTE support in this category. I don't. LTE was coming to the iPhone regardless of what the competition did. It was just a question of when Apple was ready to do it. Increased display size may qualify as a response to how Apple saw the market shifting with other products, but it is too general a characteristic to qualify as "imitation."

Basically, there is not much that Apple imitates when it comes to upgrading the iPhone. It doesn't have to do so, as it is the design leader that everyone else tries to imitate.

Bottom Line

With the iPhone 5's increased display size and LTE support, competing smartphones lose two of their biggest competitive advantages. In most other ways, the iPhone 5 matches or excels beyond the competition. You can debate whether the iPhone's camera should have more megapixels or whether the omission of NFC support is important, but that's about it.

On the other hand, I don't find much about the iPhone 5 that is truly new and compelling. But hardware specs are not the total story. With the improvements coming in iOS 6 and iTunes 11, the iPhone's ecosystem remains outstanding. Android devices can only dream of matching this.

An iPhone media event may no longer hold the excitement it once did (it certainly does not for me). The innovations may not be as great as they once were (perhaps an inevitable consequence of a maturing product). Android devices are still likely to retain their dominance in overall market share (although I believe it will begin to shrink).

Even so, I expect the iPhone 5 to hang on to the crown for the single best, most popular, and most profitable smartphone in the world. Apple doesn't have to knock socks off each year to retain that crown. It's sufficient to just stay ahead of the competition. That it does. And that should be more than enough for the iPhone 5 to qualify as a huge success.

iPod touch

At yesterday's media event, Apple also announced a major update to the iPhone's sibling: the iPod touch. Two observations:

Specs. For whatever reason, Apple doesn't want the touch to match the specs of the iPhone. The new touch sports the same 4" display as the iPhone 5. However, it retains the A5 instead of the A6 processor. It has a 5MP instead of an 8MP iSight camera. And it still has no GPS or 3G/LTE options (even though these are available in the phone-less iPad).

Price. Apple did not drop the price of the iPod touch. As I wrote last week, I still wonder how well this will fit in with the pricing of the iPad mini, expected to be announced next month.

[Note: For my brief overview of the new iPod nano, introduced yesterday, check out: Apple's crazy iPod nano.]

Popular TMO Stories



No matter what Apple announces, it’s becoming harder and harder for me to conjure up enthusiasm.

Of course, that just about everything was leaked in advance took a lot of the excitement out of it. Like wrapping all your Xmas presents in clear plastic. Add to that the 30% of the leaks that did not come true means that you have no anticipation and a bit of disappointment.

Every smartphone comes with something to stick in your ears; still, I believe the EarPods qualify as an innovative change for the iPhone.

And when I finally get a pair of them, they will go in the basket with all the other earbuds that have come with my iPods, phones of various kinds, computers, and other things. I can’t stand earbuds. I’ll keep my headphones and/or speakers.

Apple did not drop the price of the iPod touch. As I wrote last week, I still wonder how well this will fit in with the pricing of the iPad mini, expected to be announced next month.

I wonder about that. Will they really compete with each other? One is a 4” screen pocket device and the other is an 8” screen small tablet. Will they be competing against each other? Could it be that between the two devices they will grab a huge chunk of the small tablet market?  It would seem that if one wants real estate they’ll take one and if one wants portability they’ll take the other. Either way Apple wins.

Lee Dronick

I like the earbud design because they do let me hear some ambient sounds, they are what I carry when out and about. I also have a chronic fungus problem in my ears that flares up and down and currently I can not wear any kind of incanal earphones. I do have and use a pair of sound suppressing earmuff style when I need to isolate.

r u serious

Apple has been successful due to Innvovations it bought ot he phone world and clever marketing. All the stock price increase is due to iphone which contributes almost 50%to Apple’s bottom line.

Apple has been mundane with both Iphone 4s and Iphone5 with no major innvoations.
IPS touch display Nokia N920 has that
LTE ? Almost all devices have it
4” size I have a Droid X which I bought 3 years back which is 4.3 ” Nokia N920 is 4.5”
Lightening Connector ? JUst there to fatten Apple’s bottom line. Apple is becoming more like the Roman empire Fat and Greedy and LAzy.
As soon as Steve jobs is gone the Wow factor is gone. THere are incremental changes only to Apple’s products not Innovative.

Iphone is going to sell well in this quarter but moving forward it is going to go down there are better more innovative products like Nokia N920 with wireless charging, cooler headphones, Cooler looking with IPS display with higher resolution than Iphone, With Pureview camera technology which is superior to Iphone.

Android is going to be a big loser in this 3 way fight between Apple, Ios and Windows.
Apple has it sdie hard fans but Android user base is going to gradually decrease due to Manufacturers vary with pending litigations after Apple’s victory over Samsung.
As long as Nokia releases the N920 on time it is going to be the underdog hit and Nokia would have a trickle down effect on its lower end phones.
Nokia also has a native navigation app which no other windows os8 developer like samsung would be able to emulate as Nokia owns NAvteq which supplies in car navigation systems maps for HOnda, Acura Ford etc.

Nokia would have that edge over other manufacturers and also Nokia Lumia phones are cooler looking just think Nokia to be the new Apple.
Enough grey white and Black phones.

Nokia is the new Apple .

Sydnee Bux

I’m not trying to start a “Android / IOS is better” debate, but the following statement hasn’t been true for awhile:

“It doesn’t have to do so, as it is the design leader that everyone else tries to imitate.”

While I love Apple products, there’s no avoiding the fact that after the first iPhone (which admittedly began the touchscreen / smartphone race), Apple has been playing catch up. 

Sure their phone is smooth, attractive and sleek.  On the other hand, its Operating System and Hardware has been a little behind the Android movement the day after the first Android was released with a Cut / Paste feature.

It’s hard for a single closed-source company (despite it’s massive reach) to compete with an entire movement of open-source companies building faster, innovative and constantly evolving devices. 

I own quite a few Apple devices, and while I enjoy the Apple experience, it’s time to come to terms with the fact that they’re struggling to impress those, not already a part of the club.  They’re getting left behind.  Frivolous law suits are only going to keep them relevant for a little longer. 

The last few releases of the iPhone have simply been a response to the Android devices that have the same (or better) specifications and functionality, but have been out for a year already.



Paul Goodwin

r u.  and Syndee:  you’re failing to realize why people buy Apple products. They don’t just buy a piece of hardware. iPhones sell because of everything that they do, and that is because of the software. And from no other company do you get anywhere near the level of cohesive integration of hardware and software that you get with Apple products. Being a fairly closed system allows this to happen. But they are open to software developers to produce anything innovative, which is where the power of this device lies. They’re making the hardware just high performance enough to allow for step increases in functionality via software. They aren’t playing catch-up, the rest of the industry is. Nokia 920s will be fine pieces of hardware (most likely) but will people go buy it ? No. Why? Because they (Nokia) have put themselves in a position where nobody believes in them, and they have no established ecosystem. They’ll sell them as give-always at the carriers. And Android based phones are great too, but they are a disjointed population, and users (less tech oriented ones) won’t get the benefits because there isn’t a one shop masterpiece like what Apple has designed. The phone hardware is just a piece of the picture. Every three months someone beats someone else at the hardware spec game. But that doesn’t make something a better product. Great products do most everything you need better than most and more easily than anyone else. The reliability of Apple’s devices ( hardware and software ) is surpassed by nobody. Their visual appeal is always there, and their functionality is astounding because of the software available. Apple learned years ago with the Newton, that even though new technology is cool, there needs to be systems in place for people to benefit, and when there’s no benefit, they won’t pay for that technology. So it doesn’t surprise me that things like NFC didn’t make it into this phone. My iPhone 4 is still a completely valid, fine machine because Apple’s phones are powerful enough and reliable enough to last for years, and they don’t get old because the App Store is there. The iPhone 5 will be amongst the sales leaders because of everything Apple is. And that’s the world’s #1 company in their field.

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

With the iPhone 5’s increased display size and LTE support, competing smartphones lose two of their biggest competitive advantages.

Existing Verizon LTE phones will let you talk and access data on LTE simultaneously. But not the iPhone 5. I don’t know if any of you remember when this feature was a key differentiator for AT&T after the arrival of the Verizon Unicorn.

On size, iPhone 5 is like an entry level Android phone.


“Existing Verizon LTE phones will let you talk and access data on LTE simultaneously. But not the iPhone 5.”

Do you know this for certain, or are you speculating? As I don’t use Verizon, I don’t much care to try to research it. But it is curious if true. Would that be choice made by Verizon or Apple?

Lee Dronick

See today’s Joy of Tech comic

Paul Goodwin

Apple made a design choice to not include a third radio/antenna.

From MacRumors

The Verge has confirmed that the Verizon version of the iPhone 5 will not support simultaneous voice and data. 

The AT&T iPhone has supported simultaneous talk and data since the iPhone 3G was released because of the GSM network it uses.

Verizon gave this statement to MacRumors:
iPhone 5 was designed to allow simultaneous voice calling on the Verizon Wireless network while browsing the Internet over WiFi. This is no different from the current iPhone 4S.
Sprint has not yet confirmed whether its iPhone 5 will support simultaneous voice and data, but it uses the same physical hardware as the Verizon iPhone. The Verge assumes that it will be behave the same way.

Update: According to The New York Times, it was Apple’s choice to prevent Sprint and Verizon phones from using both LTE data and voice on simultaneously. Because the LTE network only supports data and not voice, Apple would have to add a third antenna to the iPhone 5 to allow both LTE data and CDMA voice together.

An Apple spokeswoman told The Times, “It is not yet possible to do simultaneous voice and data on networks that use CDMA for voice and LTE for data in a single radio design.”

From the Times:
So why does Verizon’s Samsung Galaxy S III, a 4G LTE phone, juggle calls and data? Samsung added an extra antenna so that it pulls data from the 4G LTE network at the same time that it’s using another antenna to do voice, said Anand Shimpi, editor in chief of AnandTech.

Then why didn’t Apple add another antenna? It actually already has two antennas in an effort to improve reception, and it would have had to add a third antenna just for Verizon and Sprint phones to give them simultaneous data and calls, Mr. Shimpi explained. Leaving that third antenna out allows Apple to simplify its manufacturing process of the iPhone for multiple carriers. Plus, in the next two years the 4G LTE network is supposed to evolve to support voice calls, which would render another antenna unnecessary later.

Paul Goodwin

Bosco. What does this mean? “On size, iPhone 5 is like an entry level Android phone.”

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

Do you know this for certain, or are you speculating?

LOL @Intruder. Talking on the phone while getting driving directions is not going to work too well for Verizon and Sprint iPhone users. They’ll need last years Nexus phone for that.

@Paul: It means that when you walk into a Verizon store and grab any of the free to $100 Android phones, they are as big to bigger than the iPhone 5. The Retina display on the iPhone is very nice. Don’t get me wrong. But to a majority of consumers who will buy a smartphone, 4” is small. Even a crappier display at 4.3” or 4.6” will be easier to see, with bigger targets to tap.


I have had several iPhones in the past.  I didn’t upgrade to the 4S because of eligibility. A month or so ago, i bought a Samsung Galaxy S3 and love it.  I have question though.  How can you say “the ability to take still photos at the same time you are recording video is new and a welcome innovation”?  How is it innovative when other phones, including my Android, were already able to do this?

Ted Landau

Randy: Re: ” How can you say “the ability to take still photos at the same time you are recording video is new and a welcome innovation”?

My error. Since posting the column, I have become aware that this feature has already been available on some Android phones. Had I known this, I would have omitted the feature from my list.

Of course, it’s still a cool feature, and I’m glad Apple decided to include it in the new iPhone.


@Bosco: Not sure why the lol. It was an honest and valid question. I had not heard that Verizon iPhone 5s will not allow simultaneous data and voice. Sounds like a conscious design choice by Apple, with the expectation that LTE will eventually allow both voice and data simultaneously.

Regarding size, isn’t it a bit presumptuous to say that “to a majority of consumers who will buy a smartphone, 4” is small,” unless you have data that indicates that the majority of smart phones being sold have screens larger than 4”? Does the data support this? I honestly don’t know the answer to that question. Do you?

Paul Goodwin

Bosco. We’ve had a lot of discussion about the size of phones. Apple’s now being 4” hardly means entry level. IMO my 3.5” iPhone 4 is big enough to do email, texting, and telephoning. Having a screen even an inch bigger wouldn’t give you enough screen area to be a pleasurable internet browsing tool. I’m not sure if even a 7” tablet is good enough. I wouldn’t want to view a full browser on anything smaller than an iPad, it’s just too frustrating. A 4” retina screen is planty. To me the criteria is not the screen size, but the phone size and weight. Entry level? pisshh..Come On Man.

Paul Goodwin

And as for having LTE data and voice simultaneously, I see no drawback at all. Virtually every time I’ve needed simultaneous voice and data, I’ve been where there’s a WiFi so it works even better. Where would I be to need it? In a car? No-that’s dangerous. Out on a walk? Maybe if I felt like ruining a good walk with simultaneous voice and data on a telephone and didn’t mind looking like tech dork. True there may be some remote users that could benefit, but how many are there compared to the urban and suburban population?  Apple probably just didn’t think it was a very big driver for their design. Personally I agree with their design tradoff. Plus with a decent signal level, the page load times aren’t very long with the lower speed phone service (AT&T’s anyway). So who would benefit from having the third antenna? Well I would have benefitted one time in the past 18 months of owning my iPhone 4 where I was calling and WiFi wasn’t available.

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

The LOL was for the snark in your question, Intruder. Like I could make that sh*t up.

Paul, I have a few web apps that actually run very nicely on the now previous iPhone and iPod Touch, and will run just as nicely on the iPhone 5 and new iPod Touch. They also run nicely on Android phones. We support both, because our users have both. Personally, I feel that the experience is better on the larger, wider screens even though the pixel density isn’t there. It’s more readable when a little larger, especially for older eyes. It’s more tappable when a little larger, especially for clumsy fingers. For me, the same observations generalize to popular games, like Angry Birds, Cut the Rope, etc.

Paul, you do need it in the car. Data is how driving directions and maps work. More than 3/4 of drivers regularly talk while driving. It’s not just some marginal minority group of which I’m overly proud to be a member. So if you’re talking to a client or kids, and your maps and driving directions aren’t working, you might be a little less safe as you flounder around and have to look for signs and all that. It is a serious enough concern that Verizon has baked simultaneous CDMA talk and LTE data into every LTE phone they have offered, and even baked simultaneous CDMA talk and 3G data into their first LTE smartphone, the HTC Thunderbolt.

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

Paul, additionally… If you’re on a walk and talking on the phone, wouldn’t you expect iMessage to continue to work? Just saying…


Wow, Brad. You sure look for conflict where there is none. And you of all people calling my question snarky is hilarious. You should try reading your own posts.

In any event, it is unfortunate that the iPhones for Verizon and Sprint don’t support simultaneous voice and data, but I’ll bet the impact to sales will be minimal.



It sounds to me as if you might be experiencing a touch of burn out. It does happen in every craft or profession. My observation is that, if so, it is best to simply roll with it. If something is a genuine love and passion, that love and passion will find their way back to the surface - all in good time - and often under unexpected circumstances, which only enhances the delight of re-enkindlement.

I agree with your assessment of not putting Apple’s deployment of a larger screen size or use of LTE into the ‘imitative’ list. This leads me to a couple of observations about pundits’ assessment of Apple vs their competitors. I have mentioned these before, but repetition can be good in moderation.

First, is a tendency amongst some pundits to set their own criteria for a successful Apple product launch, and then pronounce Apple’s product launch a disappointment if not a failure if it fails to meet those criteria. I place in this category, for example, Apple not coming out with a radical new design (e.g. iPod Nano-esque in scope), or Apple not introducing some novel technology in order to be ‘first’ to do so. I argue that, were Apple to do the former (radically change the iPhone’s design) these or similar pundits would cite this as evidence of Apple having lost their way, and not knowing their product or to whom to pitch it.

Second, and related to the first, is what I believe to be a complete misread by many pundits of when and why Apple introduce new technology or upgrade their product specs. These are two separate issues: 1) new technology, and 2) spec upgrades. Apple are strategic at introducing both, in different ways. Regarding new technology, Apple, in my view, only introduce these when they can guarantee a common, consistent, and standardised user experience across their client base. Of what value is a technology if the majority of Apple clients cannot use it; or if the experience varies substantially between users in different settings? This would lead to dissatisfaction and a sense of being misled about a product’s performance. Instead, Apple waits until this can be consistent and standardised, and then, while not necessarily the first to introduce it, will be the first to create a standardised, best-in-class user experience across their base. This is the ‘first’ that matters. The point being, Apple may not always be first to introduce novel tech, but they are generally the first to create a consistent user experience around it. Regarding spec upgrades, given Apple’s market prominence, Apple push their competitors to deploy superior specs simply to stay in the game. These cost, and erode competitors’ already slim margins, and starve R&D of needed research funding. What Apple have is an integrated system of products and services that define an experience unrivalled in the industry. A competitor like Nokia have to compete with a device sporting, say, a superior camera; or Google with a superior software mapping feature. Neither superior specs nor features do a superior user experience make - and Apple know this. Apple will upgrade specs when it is cost-effective to do so, and when it can be done without sacrificing performance or form. Many pundits miss this, and fail to see the internal damage being inflicted on the competition.

There is a third observation that I am seeing with the iPhone 5 launch, namely to pronounce it a ho-hum, boring affair, showcasing only a marginally spec increased product, wholly lacking novelty. It is difficult with TMO’s new comments interface to provide references, however there are plenty in the blogosphere, and some have been cited already by TMO. Some pundits have gone so far as to suggest (as if this is a novel thought) that Apple’s best innovative days are behind them, and that Apple are now circling the drain of irrelevance. All of these speculations have been belied by the public’s response to the new iPhone during pre-order; the phones sold out in one hour. So much for disappointing and irrelevant. Without doubt, some wounded word warrior somewhere will cry out from his mother’s basement about Apple ‘iSheep’ mindlessly swigging koolaid and purchasing these inferior products in ignorance of superiorly tricked out Android or Windows phones.

While I think that some pundits do over-rate their own perspicacity, I argue there is a difference between a thoughtful and systematic maturation of a product and the introduction of the ‘next big thing’ - which these pundits appear at times to conflate; while simultaneously failing to comprehend the strategic deployment of product upgrades in the art of war. Apple should continue its systematic and strategic product evolution. The next big thing is another beast altogether, but is likely already lurking in the shadows.

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

Of what value is a technology if the majority of Apple clients cannot use it; or if the experience varies substantially between users in different settings?

(a) There are plenty of iPhone features that the majority of Apple clients can’t or haven’t figured out. See the popular “tips” articles on this site.

(b) There are plenty of technologies already on competing phones that ordinary people can use very effectively. NFC (for payments) comes to mind. So does simultaneous talk and data on CDMA/LTE.

I think monetization is a better (but not complete) explanation for what Apple puts in and leaves out. If they can sell you 10 new adapters you’ll need anyway plus one for every old iPhone accessory you have, you’ll get a sleek, new power slot. If they can’t get a percent of payments, you’ll wait another year for NFC.

Paul Goodwin

Bosco, your monetization statement is ridiculous. Other companies make the adapters for the accessories and the phone comes with the one you need for charging and the computer interface. They changed the connector to gain space in the phone - period. Those kind of statements are as bad as the bozo unsubstantiated one liners on the Apple basher sites.

And as for NFC,  there’s extremely limited places where you can use this technology now. When stores move from swiping your credit card to NFC devices, that technology will make it into the phone. It’s of zero practical use to nearly all users. People apparently think Apple should lead the effort to get stores to use it. Why would Apple add that cost when nobody would get to use it?

And the statement about users needing to use tips to use a technology is pretty dull too.  The statement “Of what value technology is….” is a completely valid point that isn’t debatable. Come on man!

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

Paul, nobody is making a Lightning adapter without a paid license from Apple. It’s the same situation as the previous iPod connector. You’re going to pay $20+ for every one of these adaptors or cables you need. There will be no Amazon Basics version for $10 or cheap Chinese cable/adapter that works just as well as all the others for $2.

You can imply that I’m a bozo all you like, but it doesn’t change the reality. If you think this isn’t reality, perhaps you can come up with a proxy bet that would show that Apple doesn’t see this as a toll booth. I’ve suggested a good one above.

Paul Goodwin

Where did you get your paid license info? I can get a current iPhone 4   30 pin to USB cable for $3.25 and you’ll be able to get the same with the Lightning connector within weeks most likely. The adapter might be a little more but likely $10 or less if you shop around. Why would you think it will be any different with this new connector?

Log in to comment (TMO, Twitter or Facebook) or Register for a TMO account