The Perfect Phone Storm? 567
peter deacon writes "Is the iPhone the next Segway, the next Zune, or the next iPod? The Perfect Storm offers some iPhone details that aren't secrets, but tend to be lost upon the analysts and journalists cranking out hit pieces on the iPhone. Why is everyone from Gartner to Gizmodo calling for a boycott of the iPhone? An interesting take on how Apple's new mobile phone will push to open up the web as a mobile platform for every mobile device on the market with a standards-based browser, and how Apple 'hacked the hackers' by releasing Safari for Windows in advance of its new phone."
AT&T (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
"Gizmodo called for an iPhone boycott "for the foreseeable future" as a righteous protest against AT&T, a brand it associates with "Microsoft-style anti-competitive maneuvers and anti-privacy efforts á la RIAA." "
I agree, AT&T giving your internet traffic to the NSA is a non-issue.
Consumers, please continue consuming.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:AT&T (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm going to get an iPhone unless the service is too expensive. I have Wi-Fi at home and at work. I don't anticipate using EDGE unless I'm pulled over to the side of the road loading a map. In which case I'll be so happy to have it that I won't really give a shit if it is slow.
As a side-effect, the typical iPhone could end up putting substantially less strain on the EDGE network than the typical non-iPhone EDGE device, since, for example, most email syncs will happen over Wi-Fi. (Consider that my phone spends at least two-thirds of every week day either at home or the office. That's half the hours of the week, assuming I never go home on the weekends!)
It think that this is a master stroke on AT&T's part. They're going to ding every iPhone buyer for data every month, and nobody is going to use it!
-Peter
Hype hype, buzz buzz (Score:2, Insightful)
Article text (Score:5, Informative)
Here's a deconstruction of a few myths that have failed to take these unhidden secrets into consideration, along with the final aspect of why Apple released Safari for Windows, as I promised to reveal in the last article. It has something to do with the iPhone, of course.
Segway Segue, or AirPort Runway?
The levels of both enthusiastic hype and detractors' hate over the iPhone appear to have handily eclipsed one of the last ultra-hyped new devices of the tech world: Dean Kamen's Segway personal transporter.
Back in 2001, the Segway was presented sight unseen as the mysterious, revolutionary invention Ginger. It was privately shown to a handful of luminaries--including Steve Jobs--who all seemed excited about its potential. When actually revealed to the public, it was met with a mix of interest and ridicule, in part due to its steep price tag. After all, if you can't afford it, it must be silly and impractical.
Kamen's claim that the Segway would change society and that cities would be reconfigured to account for a world mobilized by two wheeled robot transporters didn't work out as planned.
San Francisco--one of the few cities to have enough flush nerds to warrant opening up a Segway dealership--actually banned the device on its sidewalks in a frantic, spastic panic about public safety concerns.
On the other hand, there have also been runaway hits that initially received little hype, criticism, or attention. Apple's AirPort introduced a mainstream audience to WiFi wireless networking. Apple wasn't the first implementation on Earth, but it did offer a pioneering set of products that delivered ease of use on a level that is still unmatched.
The iPod was also greeted with passive yawns and dismissed as too simple, too expensive, and uninteresting by critics, only to build into a phenomenon that changed the music industry, made Apple's simple music players a household name, and established the company as a top consumer brand.
The Devil in the Details.
Unlike the Segway, the iPhone isn't a hyped tease. Apple introduced the device six months ago with a full demonstration of how it actually worked, assigned it a firm price tag, published its technical specifics down to the millimeter and gram, and provided a comprehensive look at its features and underlying technologies.
In comparison, Microsoft's Zune--which had been in the news just a few months earlier--was presented from the start as having an unclear feature set. Fans made broad assumptions about its capabilities, resulting in great disappointment. Analysts overreached to claim that Microsoft would eat up Apple's iPod market share by offering a highly subsidized unit, or even offer it for free with a subscription plan, neither of which actually happened.
As the "iPod Killer" got closer to release, its price was still a secret and its key features were revealed to be more limited that anyone imagined. Its highly touted WiFi became nothing more than a way to squirt advertisements to friends, exploiting "the Social" in an attempt to sell music in Microsoft's new PlaysForSure-incompatible version of its impossible to crack Janus DRM.
Only its violent failure could silence the giddy critics that gushed about its supposed game changing, iPod killing impact that never happened. The Zune made the Segway look like a runaway hit.
The Desperate Panic of the Apple Haters.
It is therefore interesting to compare the news sources that gushed over the Zune--with little information from Microsoft--and encouraged their readers to blow $250 on one, because they are today providing a non-stop emergency warning siren that ignores everything we've been told by Apple about the iPhone to instead present a
Re:Article text (Score:5, Funny)
No kidding. At this point I wouldn't be surprised if Jobs announced that the iPhone would be the harbinger of the technological singularity.
-Grey [wellingtongrey.net]
It's from Roughlydrafted? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, I know, ad hominems are bad, but every Roughlydrafted article is like that. That guy is probably minting AdSense-gold from people who get too worked up about Apple (both pro and contra).
I'm torn, really (Score:5, Funny)
Zuneway!
Apple zealots (Score:5, Insightful)
He was caught gaming Digg, you know. [googlepages.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Apple zealots (Score:5, Funny)
In Jesus Christ's favor, he was at one point considering literally taking away this shill's platform right from under his feet, so to speak.
But then he thought and said "let he who is without an iPod, throw the first stone". Everyone stood still.
As a mac user who doesn't want the damn thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:As a mac user who doesn't want the damn thing (Score:5, Interesting)
I would be more concerned if there wasn't a notebook update. Desktops are "dying" so to speak for consumers which is where Apple targets. http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/06/22/app
This push for the iPhone will in fact help Mac users and possibly standards users. If the iPhone is very successful, Safari / web standards compatibility will be a requirement. I don't have to keep wondering when the top hit list will ever change over (http://webkit.org/projects/compat/hitlist.html). More services will open up for the Mac; for instance, push IMAP instead of proprietary Blackberry protocols may become standard which would allow desktop apps to take advantage of. Better synchronization support for OS X. H.264 may become a "de facto" standard which would stop the Windows Media only sites I keep encountering. There are many reasons for you to care about the iPhone as a Mac users that aren't directly related to the phone.
People who just tend to focus on Mac OS X are missing the bigger picture. I may not get an iPhone but I understand and do care about its success. And its coattails may not be limited to just Apple. Everyone benefits from a more open and standards based web. It might just take an iPhone like phenomenon (or hype machine) to nudge webmasters and other parties in the right direction.
Well... (Score:3, Informative)
So, the answer would be no. Besides it's only pretend geek phone - a real geek phone would fit in a CF socket so you could drop it into any device you like, and come with an unlimited high speed data plan as standard.
Here be drama queens (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Wow. (Score:5, Funny)
internet on a cell phone? (Score:2)
wow im so excited, its like im living in the future or something
how is this a big selling point?
ive been doing this since the the turn of the century
No Keyboard = No tactile feedback (Score:2)
I can't find ONE.
Re: (Score:2)
biased (Score:5, Interesting)
Is it like walmart, in which every mom and pop shop is going to have close, adn the big guys, like target, are going to have find innovative ways to compete?
Is it like SUVs, in which individuals are unfairly taking advantages that were meant to for farmers and laborers, thus forcing those that choose not to take advantage of the tax code to subsidize their lifestyle?
Is it like the american automaker, refusing to put put profits into R&D, seeing it's stock turn to junk.
Or is it as simple as the wackos on street corners who scream at people as the walk or drive past, imploring them not to visit a particular place because they will be putting their immortal souls in jeopardy.
I may not get an iPhone, but given the amount of money that has been spent begging people not to buy it, I look forward to how it will transform the US mobil phone market as well as the Blackberry/MS fight over the enterprise mobile market. Given the level of fear, I expect that transformation to be significant. I see IT personal having to go to training, kickbacks disappearing, and perhaps, in a perfect world, more webpages that can be read by browsers other than IE.
Tagged "shill" (Score:2)
hype and interest isn't a suprise (Score:5, Insightful)
Web (2.0) Hype (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't misconstrue why reviewers bash products (Score:5, Insightful)
We see this on slashdot all the time... we call it 'trolling'.
As for the iPhone we'll have to wait and see. While I can find things to criticize in Apple's products (as the saying goes.... you can't please all of the people all of the time) they do have a reputation for good products.
Did anybody *really* have high hopes about the Microsoft Zune? Maybe fan-boys did, but most people in the industry have come to expect that getting software from Microsoft is almost like getting software from the former KGB (it's loaded with 'bugs' and they maintain more control over your device than you do -- why should the Zune be any different.)
The high expectation about the iPhone is because so far most phones suck. It would be really nice to have a phone that sucks less than the one I have now. That phone is a Treo 650 that used to crash 3 times per day. Now it only screws up a few time per week and for some strange reason I am happy with this because I fear that every *other* phone will be just as bad and I'll just end up locked into another contract.
Speaking of contracts... AT&T (Cingular) says they plan to reelase "new phone plans" on June 29th which go with the iPhone. Having a very low opinion of phone companies, my assumption is that this will be a plan intended to rape buyers, but make up for the high price tag by offering poor service. (Please God tell me it isn't so) My hope is that since Apple was successfully able to keep the music industry from charging more than
iPhone? More like iHype... (Score:3, Insightful)
I wouldn't buy an iPhone because of that reason alone. I have two or three batteries for all my phones, and usually carry a second freshly charged one with me, because I'm not always sure I can go home everyday, or will be able to find a place to charge the phone.
I go through a new mobile maybe every two or three years, but I buy new batteries yearly or less. My phone is very important to me, I just checked and my five and a half year old Nokia 6310i has a little over 715 hours of talk time; my three year old Nokia 6230 has a bit over 482 hours; and the new Nokia 6233 I bought in December to retire the 6310 already ranks over 230 hours. Even with the 40% increase in battery time (what, it'll last 45 minutes now?), the fact I can't change the battery is still makes it a toy. Thanks, but no thanks.
Well, that, and the piss poor data rates are also laughable. What is this, 2002 all over again?
And besides, what idiot had the brilliant idea of leaving out 3G in a handset marketed towards hip, young, urban people? That's the key demographic target of 3G! Leaving it out is an egregious mistake if I ever saw one.
Price. (Score:4, Insightful)
Just as the original iPod was outlandishly over-priced for my tastes, so too is the iPhone. Give it a few years and the price will drop and the design and UI will be perfected, just like the iPod.
As a rabid mac fan myself... (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm a big fan of Apple's products, and have been almost exclusively using apple PCs since the 90s. Granted, I'm not loaded with cash, and don't rush to the nearest store anytime Apple releases a product (the longevity of their machines perhaps the biggest selling point for me. My 1999 450mhz PowerMac G4 is still chugging along, running the latest release of OS X 10.4. It's outlived my car.)
But I digress. The level of press coverage the iPhone is receiving is insane and disproportionate. I could easily deal with a flurry of press coverage around the time of the announcement, and shortly after the release (reviews, and first impressions). However, the level of hype and idle speculation building up is absurd for a product that hasn't even been released yet.
Yes. I appreciate that the iPhone is one of the first smartphones to get a properly-designed UI that wasn't created by a group of telco accountants (anybody who's ever had to deal with Verizon's "standard" UI knows exactly what I'm talking about). It could even very well revolutionize the mobile phone industry, (finally) bringing it into the data age.
It's also extremely expensive, and there's no way in hell I'll be able to afford one, or even remotely justify the cost. Remember that the iPod didn't achieve massive widespread popularity until the prices dropped considerably.
However, none of this has happened yet. It hasn't been released. Let's just hold onto our horses, wait a week, and conclusively answer these questions once the damn thing is in stores. You're all setting yourselves up for a massive letdown.
plusses and minuses (Score:4, Insightful)
+ nice UI
+ nice screen
+ small
+ nice music/video player
+ looks good
- very expensive compared to other phones
- no 3G
- no unlocking or portability to other carriers
- no GPS
- forced to use, and register with, iTunes
- no touch typing
- bad camera
- two year lock
- very limited programmability
- I don't like being lied to by Jobs about why the iPhone isn't programmable
Lack of programmability means that I don't get a number of things I have had on every phone for the last several years: an open source password safe, an SSH and VNC client, and a good e-book reader.
I expect that there will be a whole range of really exciting new phones coming out, some of which have been in the pipeline, and others inspired by the iPhone. I think this is the wrong time to lock myself into a 2 year contract, in particular at that price.
iPhone will be a sucess because... (Score:3, Insightful)
The iPhone isn't for geeks (though im sure most geeks will love it). Its for my mum, and my brother and my sister and aunt etc. Its going be simple and its going to work. Why would apple create some complex super phone for the small geek market when it can create a simple but brilliant phone for the masses? I love having lots of features, its why I have the N95 phone, but all I use it for is Voice, Text, Camera and Wi-fi. The 1001 other features it has is never used and the phone is unresponsive and slow and crashes. I just want a phone that can do the main features GOOD, and I'm guessing that most people (non-slashdoters that is) will want the same.
UI is everything. The iPod demonstrated that, and for all the people that complain there is too much hype over this phone, remember that apple didn't create this hype, its the reputation of their past products that did.
Re:slashdotted alrady? (Score:4, Insightful)
Good article, shows up quite a bit of bias on the part of certain 'reviewers'... But if you actually believed they were impartial in the first place, I've got a great bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
Re:slashdotted alrady? (Score:5, Insightful)
Article worked for me too.
So is it that the article itself is biased, accidentally wrong or just written by a bitter Apple-supporter who can't stand people laughing at this overpriced, yet-to-come non-news? Either way: It's written by a moron or a zealot and this is pretty obvious.
He complains that "Installing Palm OS software on Windows requires admin rights, forcing an administrator to install the software on every machine that syncs with a Palm.", then follows up with this:
You seriously can't mean that this is a good article.
I could go into more details, but really. If seeing that ain't enough to convince you this guy is a overly biased Apple-zealot, then nothing will.
Clarify... (Score:3)
As for iTunes, many people have it installed already, there's really no need for IT to do so.
Re:Clarify... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Clarify... (Score:4, Informative)
It does need admin access. If you try installing without admin access, it gives you an oddly worded error message such as "You don't have X component installed", rather than "You don't have admin access".
Re:Admin rights (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How is it that this is moderated "+5 insightful" when it's basically just a personal attack on the author of the article? I thought Ad Hominem attacks like "It's written by a moron or a zealot.." were more for youth oriented sites Giz and Engadget?
The poster of this comment tries to point out a logical fallacy in the article (that doesn't actually exist), and then follows up with another insult ("... this guy is an overly biased Apple-z
Re:slashdotted alrady? (Score:4, Insightful)
That was quick.
There are a lot of Apple haters, mostly with their fortunes tied to its failure. That's not going so well. TFA is just a response to the avalanche of bought-and-paid Microsoft FUD reporters who can't seem to get the term "unbiased" right. Call for an iPhone boycott? You can always hope - suckers. This article is biased toward outing those buffoons with nothing else to do except panic. I cringe at some the venom this guy has published, but as uppity and fanboyish as Dan is, he's mostly right.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That was quick.
There are a lot of Apple haters, mostly with their fortunes tied to its failure. That's not going so well. TFA is just a response to the avalanche of bought-and-paid Microsoft FUD reporters who can't seem to get the term "unbiased" right. Call for an iPhone boycott? You can always hope - suckers. This article is biased toward outing those buffoons with nothing else to do except panic. I cringe at some the venom this guy has published, but as uppity and fanboyish as Dan is, he's mostly right.
You don't have to be Apple hater to hope it fails (!). A device claiming to be smartphone which its producer spitted worst FUD against Java just because he doesn't want his precious locked environment broken by millions of java developers is enough to hate it.
Horrible media scene of Mac which apple.slashdot.org can't find unbiased articles to post is another factor.
Fanboys claiming they don't need Flash on a $600 devices browser adds more to your madness. As you can guess why Flash was not included, you go
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Biased, iPhone not ready for enterprise use (Score:5, Informative)
That article was completely biased towards the iPhone even though the author has never even used one. So many people entirely miss the point of what a Smartphone is supposed to be for the corporate world. I feel like the problem truly is that most, like the author of this article, have never used a Windows Mobile 5/6 Smartphone/PPC in a properly set up environment. Most people in fact that have used a Blackberry or Windows Mobile phone have never used them with an Exchange server or BES. Until you have used a WM5/6 phone with an Exchange 2003/7 server, I don't think that you are ready to actually critique the usefulness of Microsoft's platform.
This article advocates that the corporate world should accept the iPhone with open arms against the analysts wishes. Although the article makes this claim, the iPhone doesn't support the most basic requirements of an enterprise-grade Smartphone's purpose; over-the-air Groupware/PIM! Without supporting OTA PIM, I can't leave the office and continue working effectively...
From what we know so far, the iPhone doesn't support any of these features, even when used in conjunction with a Mac OS X 10.5 Server. Until the iPhone can meet my basic PIM needs, I have no reason to consider it instead of my HTC TyTN running WM6 Pro, and I feel that businesses need to reconsider the iPhone for these same reasons.
With all that said, I love what the iPhone is doing to stir up the Smartphone business! Hopefully all manufacturers will take notice of the iPhone's interface and start competing with creative new designs that will eventually benefit all consumers.
Re:Biased, iPhone not ready for enterprise use (Score:5, Interesting)
Bias is not a problem if you recognize it. You can learn about the viewpoints of even unreasonable extremists by reading what they write, and knowing that they are extreme in their opinions, you can evaluate how much of what they say you can agree with. Bias is only a problem with unreasonable people present biased information as if it is neutral and conveying no hidden agenda. Such as when CNN says the war in Iraq is going well. They should be providing an unbiased report of the facts, not presenting PR as news. When you watch a show that presents a clear and obvious political agenda, you are hearing opinions, not news. One can not have an unbiased opinion. Bias is expressing an opinion.
Still, nowhere does the article insist that people should buy an iPhone, although it certainly does provide reasons why IT users should question what you refer to as "analysts wishes." Really, it asks, why do these analysts wish this stuff? Why are they expressing their wishes that the iPhone be banned? Is there bias involved?
I should also assure you that the author of the article has experience in administrating Exchange 2003 and in using it with Windows Mobile phones, and that the comments made were made in relation to actual support issues.
The points you outline as important to IT are certainly worth mentioning. Some of them Apple addresses, and some of them are outside of the currently demonstrated feature set. For example, it appears that the iPhone won't edit Excel docs, although it can view them. Will Google Sheets serve this need? How many people will this really affect? Is this something that will expand in the future?
Certainly, the iPhone isn't going to satisfy 100% of the market. Apple generally targets 80% of the needs of the market. The iPod has no built in radio for example. If you really want a radio, you can buy an add on. If you really want a music player with a built in radio, you have to buy one from somebody else. That has not resulted in too many lost sales.
The iPhone will also not work for everyone. I was speaking at Lawrence Livermore Labs, where phones brought on site can't have cameras. They also can't emit radio in the form of bluetooth, WiFi or even cellular. Obviously, Apple would be stymied to develop a version of the iPhone that would work there, because it would be impossible. So LLL falls outside of places where Apple can sell iPhones. That's a pretty small portion of the market however.
I know so much about the article and its author because I wrote it.
Re:Biased, iPhone not ready for enterprise use (Score:4, Insightful)
So what you're really saying is that phones in generall can't be brought on-site -- I don't know of any mobile phone that will connect calls over a non-radio interface.
Re: (Score:3)
Gov't supplied phones can be carried around in certain areas only if the battery is removed. Personal phones aren't considered secure even if the battery is removed.
These people made the bomb.
Re:Biased, iPhone not ready for enterprise use (Score:5, Interesting)
I think the reason the iPhone elicits such varied opinions is because it *is* so divisive. There are those who look at the cellphone market today, and the devices that are available and really think the iPhone will save them from the doldrums of the currently available solutions. To a certain extent, this is really true. However, there are many people for whom the iPhone will not be an option. Generally these are the people who use the phone as a tool rather than as a phone / Internet device. There is also a subset of this second group who see the iPhone as a really missed opportunity. They are generally Apple users currently (or plan to be in the future), and see the iPhone for what it's really capable of on a technical level. They love everything about the iPhone but just see all the things they want to do with the hardware/OS and are frustrated with the limitations being imposed upon them. I have to admit that I'm sort of in this last group.
My personal feeling is that yes, the iPhone is incredibly better than any other phone out there. Note, I said phone. When it comes to devices like the SLVR, RAZR, the Verizon and Sprint phones... the iPhone will beat the crap out of any of those. I know, I've used a lot of them and I think that the iPhone will be a perfect opportunity to really change the game in that market. The price point *looks* high, but given the rumors of the $175 early contract termination standard with the iPhone, this is the price without being subsidized (as Steve Jobs alluded to many times). This makes it a perfectly reasonable price in my opinion because that's what these things cost. To buy a phone unsubsidized will START at $300 for the crappiest phone on the market. They can top the iPhone price in a hurry. I am more accustomed to this because I've bought my phones retail for years. I like my phones unlocked so I can slip in a "pay as you go" SIM card while I'm out of the country.
However, in the smartphone market the iPhone will have a tougher time. Generally those who use smartphones are either geeks (who like to develop and/or install third party apps to their devices), or executives who have a particular need (push email from Exchange for example). For these people, the iPhone will not work. Unless Yahoo! / Apple opens up their push IMAP spec and people get on the job of developing conduits for Exchange and Sendmail (or other UNIX email) systems then they're not going to look at the iPhone. Now, granted that's not who the iPhone is targeted at, either. At least, not yet.
For me, the iPhone is becoming a wait and see game. I'm glad to see it; I think it's going to shake things up in the low end and "standard phone" market quite a bit, and it's going to change people's opinions about what a phone can be. For Smartphones, though I think that's going to take more time, several software (and maybe hardware) updates before it becomes a contender... but become a contender it will. I personally will wait. I have a WinMo device today that suits my needs perfectly. Most of the apps I run on it are third party, and I don't know if I could survive on an EDGE network any more after having a taste of 3G (which is how I'm posting this, by the way). Also, the lack of real, physical tactile keys are a problem to me since I've become accustomed also to typing lengthy emails and postings to Slashdot on an HTC TyTN. It's not perfect... and there are things the iPhone does that I look at and think I'd really like. However, the limits imposed upon me with an iPhone would be untenable to me and I don't think I'm alone.
Note I also don't believe that the limits imposed on this first-gen iPhone will last forever, either. Apple has always been an extremely developer-friendly company and I don't see why that will change. Sooner or later I do believe they'll open up the iPhone to devs, and they'll open up the "networks" to be more flexible (though that may come down to contracts with AT&T). Until they do, the iPhone's not for me... but I do see how it can be for others. Perhaps my wife will like one...
Maybe "Enterprise" is not ready for the iPhone (Score:4, Insightful)
I certainly agree with you that there may be some deficits, particularly in early versions. I'm not spending my money on the 29th, at least. But I'm also glad to see the end game of this creativity: other smartphone makers will be forced to step up their games.
From the extensive needs you have of specific functions, it's probably true that you won't be well served by an iPhone. I think, frankly, Apple has its eye on a broader public than enterprise. MS keeps its eye on you and your needs. But there are, right now, a billion people who use cells; the market is very large. Maybe Apple will develop cheaper phones, iPods really, and more business-oriented software, I don't know. But I absolutely love the way they shake up a market. Whatever kind of phone you want -- and are you sure you don't want a small notebook? -- you're more likely to get it after the iPhone hits.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Given relative market penetrations, I suspect that there will be plenty of "enterprise-grade" customers for whom this "basic requirement" can be safely ignored. And probably the vast majority of small and mid-sized businesses as well.
It seems to me that too many people are assuming that everyone else's situation and requirements exactly parallel their own.
for christ's sake (Score:4, Insightful)
1) Company needs OTA groupware. They don't buy an iPhone: they use WM/Blackberry/etc
2) Company doesn't need OTA groupware. They buy whatever phones they can get cheap that work as a basic phone. They don't buy an iPhone.
3) Company doesn't need OTA groupware but decides that it's bored of making money for its shareholders, and buys everyone an iPhone for shits and giggles.
4) Company doesn't need OTA groupware, but does have a pressing need for its employees to be able to listen to MP3s all day, post pictures to Flickr and mess with Google Maps. They buy the iPhone.
I don't know about you, but 3) and 4) don't seem to be a huge demographic...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure, a company isn't going to mind if you buy yourself a nice phone and put your work SIM card in it - I've always done this as I'd rather stab myself in the eye with a fork than use a RAZR.
I'm sure it's going to be a lovely, if expensive, device, but it's not aimed at and is not going to be successful in the business envir
Re:Is this a joke? (Score:5, Funny)
Please stand by.
Re:Is this a joke? iPod? (Score:5, Insightful)
We all know how great the iPod is. This is about the iPhone. You may want to re-read the article.
You didn't read. (Score:5, Insightful)
There are moments in the article where he intelligently breaks down aspects of the hatred being tossed around, possibly in conflict of interest scenarios. It seems much of the article points out that the iPhone gravitates heavily toward open standards, which I find to be a very good thing.
By the way, the article is not about AT&T. It's about the Apple iPhone. Thanks for registering your complaint, but please troll elsewhere.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Why would you assu
More is required (Score:5, Interesting)
I would assume it would not support this because a) GOOGLE has yet to get it working and b) If it was possible, Steve would have been talking it up at WWDC.
I assume this is Daniel Eran from RD posting, if so, good to talk to you again -- I've posted a couple comments on your blog that you've responded to and emails that you've also responded to. Let me make one thing absolutely clear -- I am not a knee-jerk Apple hater; quite the contrary -- I own a Macbook Pro which I ADORE and an eMac I rescued from my university's trash heap.
The thing that keeps galling me about the iPhone is the "could-have-beens." People have been speculating about and hoping for some kind of "pocket Mac" or "new Newton" for years, on the assertion that a machine like this running OSX would have all kinds of possibilities. Now, here we have just such a machine, and Apple is telling us that instead of being a powerful tool, it's going to be a shiny toy, and we'll like it that way. Despite the fact that there is nothing but software in the way of the iPhone's potential. It is enormously frustrating. As someone who considers himself at least on the level of "power user," it frustrated me when I heard there would be no SDK, but it really felt like a slap in the face when Steve Jobs had the balls to get up on the stage at WWDC and pretend that AJAX was something new and uniquely Apple.
I'm sure the iPhone will be a stunning success, but I have a feeling we'll still be sitting here waiting for Apple to rescue us from Windows Mobile for a long, long time.
Re:More is required (Score:5, Interesting)
I can think of features I'd like to see too, and can imagineeer video conferencing and free VoIP over WiFi. And what about voice recognition and voice synthesis and voice mail trees and an iTunes store client... The thing is that many of these things are either engineering problems or have to wait because Apple has finite resources.
I'd rather get an iPhone now and watch it improve as Apple releases software updates for it that wait for it to be released until it could serve any need anyone could imagine. A general purpose computer would quickly turn into the Newton, which was ~$900. It lacked a clear obvious use, and only offered the potential to do a lot of things that its relatively small user base could not actually support.
The iPhone is already so much better than my Treo or the WM phones I've looked at, even the high end Nokia phones -- for what I want to do with a mobile. If it gets a market base similar to the iPod's, it will result in a vibrant platform that will have to deliver demanded features. It will create a vacuum for development. That won't detract from people who want something else. There will always be a market for N95s or WinCE phones tied into Microsoft's server and VB environment, and Treos... well not Treos, I think this will kill Palm.
That's what I see: no reason for threat. The only thing Apple can do to rivals is raise the bar, forcing them to compete and push the envelope themselves. That's why I don't understand all the hate and try to deflate it with some reality.
It's a lot like the Mac: the only thing Apple has done to the PC is to help push standards like USB, push tight integration, and push innovative features. PC users benefit from Apple being around, even if they never choose to buy anything from it. I think choice is good, and that innovation needs to be welcomed, not scorned. The mobile business is tragically boring, and the iPhone will help shake things up. I think the engineering decisions Apple is making are all pretty smart, and I like to describe why. If that makes me a "fanboy," well then yipee, I don't mind. As you've probably noticed, I have my own detractors, and I've learned to deal with it. I just like to write.
I hope you're right (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Certainly it is true that USB ports were available prior the the iMac, however USB devices generally were not. After the introduction of the iMac, USB suddenly became prevalent, largely due to the fact that the fairly large body of iMac owners had no other options for conn
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Conversely, the hardware makers who put USB on PCs were also guilty of slowing its adoption by leaving legacy RS-232 and parallel ports on their PCs until around 2006. Apple simply stripped everything old off the iMac and left USB as the only option. It also provided a fair keyboard and a horrible yoyo mouse that forced dem
Re: (Score:2)
Do you hear anybody laughing? (Score:2)
Not only did such purity in news reporting scarcely ever exist, as you might discover by reading Manufacturing Consent, but whatever elements of it did exist have largely been abandoned by corporations and are also little in evidence online in
I thought it was useful (Score:3, Insightful)
I found it useful in several places. Recently my father forwarded me an email from his boss (IT email/blackberry support) saying they were taking a wait-and-see approach on the iPhone, and refusing support for the moment. The reasons for doing so were basically a copy and paste of Gartner's assessment--including the fact that there was no Notes/Exchange support.
I'm not in IT (anymore) so I didn't know that Notes/Exchange support IMAP and POP, so the claim of no Notes/Exc
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, more than IMAP and POP they are probably concerned with the groupware (calendaring and the like) features of Exchange and Notes. Blackberry does IMAP and POP fine with any server, but for anything beyond that you need a dedicated server that only interfaces with Exchange, Notes and Groupwise (I think). How will iPhone deal with this has not been s
Re:Is this a joke? (Score:5, Insightful)
iPhone is an extension of the iPod and media business, not the computer business. It's driving feature is that it's an iPod... most business won't sign up for that, Period. Apple is trying to get the Web, music and video features to the PEOPLE, not companies (because they won't use it anyway) The goal of 90% of cell phone at this point is to get companies to buy dozens and lock them their networks. IF you don't have a business network for your smart phone, adding applications, or connecting to email is just a pretty feature, because unless you work for a company that pays, you don't ever get half the features that makes the phones so great.
Apple wants People to have phones.. it's a market 10x bigger than what Windows mobile or Palm have made for themselves with a 5 year head start. Ask yourself, with a 5 year head start, why are "smartphones" still only "Geek" toys? Why aren't they good enough for everybody? Apple is trying to get it's 10% of the market by bringing NEW users into smartphones!! not simply making a phone for the droves of industry pundits and IT managers looking for a new toy. I think a lot of the bad reviews are because Apple is not catering to what the pundits say they should be doing, not passing out previews like candy, not caving to pressure to add every special interest feature under the sun and being ignored makes the big players really upset because their whole business is being "in the loop" and Apple is cutting them out with a vengeance.
Re:Is this a joke? (Score:5, Interesting)
The biggest problem with smartphones and the iPhone is size. If you aren't carrying a bag or wearing cargo pants, they just don't fit. Going out dancing or bar hopping with a Treo clipped to your hip just looks stupid. If they really want to revolutionize phones, every iPhone needs to come with an iPhone-nano that rings at the same phone number.
Re:Is this a joke? (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, clipping anything to your belt, whether it's a sliderule, calculator or phone looks stupid.
Re:Is this a joke? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What? (Score:5, Informative)
I think you are missing the reason clubs and bars make so much money.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes. Yes it is. As for the iPhone, would be glad to drop the phone part of it and have a web surfing video iPod and no contract lock in. Ok, I really want a Newton 3000.
An SDK (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple could have killed about 20 birds with one stone if they had polished their internal SDK up a bit and released it with the iPhone. Instead they chose to massively insult their developer crowd at WWDC by passing off AJAX as a "sweet solution." What happens to their "sweet solution" when there is no network available?
Ballmer may be a whackjob, but he's right about four things: "Developers, developers, developers, developers." Without those, your "smart" product looks pretty dumb.
What is the upshot of all this? A closed box with fancy tricks is not worth $499. An open box with OSX running underneath it that can run a Skype client (appealing to personal users), a variety of media players (appealing to personal users), games that actually make use of the hardware (appealing to personal users) and other things we haven't even thought of yet *IS* worth $499.
Absurdity (Score:4, Insightful)
Look, I've done mobile development. I want an SDK badly.
But an SDK not being a "special interest feature"? Come on, you know 99% of phone buyers are not going to be developing thier own applications.
As for buying or using other apps, that's where you get into the greay area of how many apps people buy today are replacable with web based versions, how many Apple will bring to market for third parties, and how useful the internal applications are (since Windows Mobile users I know are mostly buying apps to replace built-in phone applications which are terrible).
As SDk is delightful but there are other ways to fulfil the general needs an SDK addresses without offering an SDK to everyone.
In time, I'm sure we'll have a fuller SDK - but in the meantime the compromise offered will be good enough to fill many application needs, at least all the ones I had ever bought for the Palm.
You make my head hurt (Score:3, Insightful)
The SDK is not for the 99% of phone buyers. It is for the 1% of people who know how to use it. That way that 99% of phone buyers has other applications to use on their phones.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Then in what way is that not a special interest? Is not 1% the very definition of special interest? I would love my car to actually be amphibious as well, should all car makers insure each car meets this special need because one man proclaims if of use?
That way that 99% of phone buyers has other applications to use on their phones.
They already have applictions. It ships with them.
They will have other applications
They aren't as numerous as you think. (Score:5, Insightful)
The number of people who actually install 3rd party applications onto Palm OS/WM smartphones has been GROSSLY over estimated. The bare basic PIM functions of these smartphones is all most of these folks are looking for. With the Smartphone we had gone from 2 devices to 1 but then the iPod came out bringing us back to 2 devices. For some folks who haven't upgraded to Smartphones yet they're actually still at 3 devices now. The iPhone is THE convergence device that will bring nearly everyone back to having just one device. And Apple will be able to intice more people to install 3rd party applications onto their iPhones than all other smartphones COMBINED.
So to recap, the lack of an SDK here is a non-event. Its totally immaterial. It just doesn't matter at all in the grand scheme of things. The iPhone is going to sell like hotcakes, out selling all other smartphones individually and combined because of its INTERFACE, not because you can or cannot install 3rd party apps on it from launch.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
SInce WIndows Mobile and the Treo and Blackberry have been around forever, by now then the ability to install third party apps must have delivered many killer apps, each selling above a million or so.
Name them. If third party apps are really so important, name the ones that a majority of the smartphone market finds indespensible.
This is just from Handango which is mainly Symbian download/license site... In fact, it is one of "classy" sites, people generally buy their software directly from Vendor.
http://corp.handango.com/Handango.jsp?siteId=1&jid =7769B9DF15DAE9X5X4CCB1CE886F8FFE&CKey=CORP_STATS& option=company [handango.com]
Millions of unique monthly visitors
650,000+ newsletter subscribers
190,000+ content titles
16,000+ content partners
Hundreds of licensees
Hundreds of countries
Dozens of currencies
Dozens of languages
9 operating system
Re:An SDK (Score:4, Insightful)
Hence most web developers writing "for Firefox first", thanks to Firebug, the Web Developer extension, and more respect for standards, and "testing and fixing for IE after". The end result - far more websites work perfectly in Firefox than you would expect strictly given IE's market share and broken standards.
It IS a bit off-topic, but seems to me like a valid parallel to the release of Safari for Windows. Despite Ballmer's "Developers" war chant, this is one area in which Microsoft is clearly missing the point.
What the hell are you talking about? (Score:4, Insightful)
From what orifice did you pluck this phantom boogeyman? There are about 12 applications on my Cingular 8525 and none of those "bricked it." There is a huge market of 3rd party applications for Palm and WM and none of those brick phones. Get real.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because they are:
A) Expensive (iPhone: check)
B) Huge (iPhone: check)
Most people prefer a basic little phone that does the job, cheaply. Nah, I don't need a touch screen to call someone.
Re:Is this a joke? (Score:4, Interesting)
Apple aims at the home market, and a small section of the professional market, namely those who do what Apple kit is good at (Design, artistic, video, audio production etc). That said, I've also seen Mac Pros and Xserve together with Xserve RAID and Xsan to do high-level research work.
Apple hasn't yet (afaik) aimed at a business which needs 2500 new terminals just to do spreadsheets and word processing. They may in the future, but for now Apple kit just isn't right for enterprise level business. It is good, however, for large production type businesses. Wander around a newspaper editing room and see what people use.
Re:Is this a joke? (Score:4, Interesting)
Apple went straight for the enterprise with OS X servers. Remember all that triumphalism a few years back about a new supercomputer being built from Xserves? How OS X was going to be the new standard for supercomputing, how all the enterprises were going to switch switch switch? Yeah, nothing came of it, so of course the fanboys rewrite history so Apple only ever aimed for the home market.
What are you reading? I don't recall any of that guff and nor should anyone else. Lets dig back in history and see what was really said: Here's a journalist's transcript of the Xserve preview event in 2002 [macworld.com] and here's a followup a few hours later with more details [macworld.com], neither of which bear out any of those assertions. The stated market was Education, Creative, Biotech and Video and they sold a lot into those areas, not to mention Government (find out how many Xserves are on U.S. Navy submarines running Linux).
As far as "triumphalism", the first anyone heard of the Mac supercomputer was when it made the top 10 Supercomputer list - and those were DESKTOPS! That generated its own hooplah when, once again, the extablishment was pulling another stick out of its eye for underperforming and overbilling.
Re:Is this a joke? (Score:5, Insightful)
"given that it's [iPod] technically inferior to products from rivals"
I am sick of hearing this. Technically inferior? Why, because it doesn't have worthless features like wi-fi or an FM tuner?
Sure there are ways to improve the iPod, but all in all, it is very well designed. Apple seems to have the sadly unique ability to choose a relatively small set of options and make them all the right options. I have had an iPod for two years now, and I have never wished for features that don't exist (with the possible exception of an easily replaceable battery.)
Re:Is this a joke? (Score:4, Insightful)
I would like my iPod to play OGGs. For all this talk in TFA about 'open standards', the iPod and iPhone don't support the most open standard of all.
(Of course, this is only important to me because I've ripped all my music to Ogg and don't want to have to convert lossy to lossy or re-rip.)
Re:Is this a joke? (Score:5, Interesting)
Really? I watched the original demo back in January, and after that I knew how to use it. I'd never held one in my hand, but if you gave me an iPhone I bet I could get all the stuff to work in a couple of minutes without using a manual.
Contrast that with my Samsung WinMobile smartphone. The manual for that is about half an inch thick (I still can't remember how to do some of the things on it). The software that is bundled has inconsistent interfaces. Nothing seems to work in a predictable way on it and the touchscreen is tiny, requires a crap stylus, has buttons all over it, and looks like ass. And, although it was a free gift from my employer, it costs more than the iPhone.
The iPhone is the original Macintosh of smartphones. The only difference is that you don't have to keep swapping disks out of it, but most people would think that a good thing.
The iPhone is going to be a massive success because a lot of people would like the functionality of a smartphone, but have been put off by the poor usability of previous efforts.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
User interfaces are nothing special. Just pixels and events. Computers are nothing special, just carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, silicon and other elements we can find easily in the world around us. Electricity is nothing special, it's just using natural phenomena to produce power.
The iPhone is nothing special.
"Frankly, being associated with Apple gets a negative mark in my book."
Ah. A zealot. Why didn't you say so earlier?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
oops, I read another roughlydrafted article (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Watch the latest video (Score:5, Insightful)
While the product may or may not succeed, you will see much of it's functionality stolen by Microsoft and the Symbian crew.
The iPhone interface makes UIQ, S60 and Windows mobile seem like dumbphones.
It's not just about the interface (Score:5, Insightful)
As much as Apple would like to believe the interface can swing it, it appears the only way to code for it right now is to write browser apps (please someone tell me I'm wrong here, I'd love to be). So your apps need to be connected. And costing you money. And limited by the need to be in the browser, so no local caching of information like google maps or live maps for mobile does. No manipulation of files store on the phone. No games outside the browser.
Nokia has the symbian sdks and java, microsoft has the .net compact framework (and in the HTC phones java as well). Apple are restricting everything to the browser (and if we're lucky, they may support flash in the browser).
So why would Symbian or Microsoft steal a restrictive programming framework? The interface may be nice, and it will sell it to end users, but it's not a phone for developers or even corporate users.
Re:It's not just about the interface (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Aah, if only I still had those mod points I just used up this morning. I thought it looked like an interesting device. Nothing ground breaking, but perhaps some cool innovations (which will probably be locked away from the rest of the world with patents). But now I am just sick of hearing about it. Every tech news site is just buzzing about it like c
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not enough time to hack the hackers (Score:3, Informative)
What it did do was expose hundreds of thousands of people to Safari (there have been over 1M downloads), helping people to accept that Safari is a real browser and ready them for iphone.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There's not enough time in the cycle for that to happen.
And why not? Safari for Windows has already been updated *twice* since its initial release, and the Mac version has been updated once. Why can't the iPhone version also be updated? And more importantly, if any of the flaws found in the Windows version affect the iPhone version, why *shouldn't* they be fixed?
There's absolutely no reason whatsoever that there can't be an "iPhone 1.01 update" awaiting every iPhone user upon their first connection through iTunes.
Re:Stupid... (Score:5, Informative)
(if you don't trust wikipedia, I'm sure you can find 100 other sources that will say the same thing)
The percentage that are using AirPort today is irrelevant to whether or not AirPort introduced Wi-fi to a mainstream audience.
Re:A level of bullshit I can barely comprehend... (Score:4, Informative)
The point was that these bugs won't affect iPhone because they arose in the process of porting to Windows, and don't exist on the OS X version.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Here's why your complaints above were undeserving of an insightful moderation:
You said I had the "gall to label some bloggers as 'impassioned.'" The gall?
While I describe a lot of people as impassioned (you're at the front of the line), its not the worst thing a person can be. What I have criticized in some of my articles is bloggers who rant on about a subject with highly emotional rhetoric without really trying to make a point, just using emotionalist language (like gall) to portray a sensationali
Re:Why do Businesses hate this already? I'll tell (Score:3, Informative)
Same way you remotely wipe all the data from a Treo. Or even a Blackberry.
You don't, unless they're stupid enough to hook it up to the network before they pull the data out.
You enforce remote security with an encrypted database that you don't keep the key to in the handheld, or simply not keeping data