Apple iPhone to be Cingular exclusive

ru2b12 wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Edgar wrote:
>>> "Kurt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>> "Edgar" <ecamacho4_nospam@nospam_hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>>> On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 17:05:17 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 15:38:34 -0800, SMS
>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> P.Schuman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Keynote is over, Apple.com has been updated:
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.apple.com/iphone/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's listed as a GSM device,
>>>>>>>>>> so probably only for Cingular for widest customer base.
>>>>>>>>> The strangest thing is that it's not 3G. It's only EDGE.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ummm.. It's also WiFi 802.11c and g
>>>>>>> Yes, but why wouldn't they include 3G so that it can use
>>>>>>> Cingular's HSDPA networks. EDGE is too slow. The original reports
>>>>>>> on the iPhone said that there would be two versions, a lower cost
>>>>>>> EDGE version, and a higher cost 3G version. Maybe the 3G version
>>>>>>> is the follow-on product, but spending $600 for a phone without
>>>>>>> 3G is ludicrous.
>>>>>> Its not just a phone, its all of a Blackberry, an iPod, a PDA, a
>>>>>> phone, and a true html browser that fits in your pocket at 5
>>>>>> ounces.. Name another phone that dioes Google Maps.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They are hints and rumors that 3G and GPS are
>>>>>> on the way, whether that can be done by firmware upgrade or next
>>>>>> years model isn't clear yet.
>>>>> To me a phone like this with all it's functionality should allow
>>>>> you to install programs for it to be a pocket pc. According to
>>>>> several sources, it
>>>>> is a closed system (like the iPod) and the only functionality
>>>>> you'll get is
>>>>> whatever Apple gives to you. Definitely not for power users, but
>>>>> probably
>>>>> perfect for all the people who prefer Apple to run their iLives.
>>>>>
>>>> Unless you buy a PDA, all the phones are "closed."
>>> Which is exactly what I was referring to, there is no comparing the
>>> iPhone to a standard cell phone, even something like the Choclate or
>>> the enV. The iPhone is competing with Blackberry's (closed systems)
>>> and PPCs (open system). I do own a PDA, and I enjoy putting whatever
>>> I want on there (limited to the amount of memory I have of course).
>>> There is easily a market for this nice looking phone, but it's not
>>> revolutionary.
>>> --
>>> Edgar
>> Good or bad, mobile devices have become little more than pocket vending
>> machines selling impulse products. As such, a mobile iPod is simply an
>> extension of the tethered iPod with even more product selection and is
>> sure to be a hit with the 14-29 demographic. In this whole thread,
>> nobody has even mentioned a concern for call quality and fidelity or
>> reception capabilities - things that old farts like me put first.
>
> We all want quality and when we can get our hands on the iPhone,
> each will determine for themselves if it falls into that category.
> I tell ya, apple must be on the right track if they can get an old fart
> like you fired up! Relax old man, step away from the rotary dial. ;-)


Rotary dial? I seen one in the city last week. Mabel down at Phone
Central is still connecting calls to the feed store. Two shorts and a
long. Yeeeee Hawww!

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'

---

› See More: Apple iPhone to be Cingular exclusive

In article <[email protected]>,
"Edgar" <ecamacho4_nospam@nospam_hotmail.com> wrote:

> "Kurt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "Edgar" <ecamacho4_nospam@nospam_hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...
> >> > On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 17:05:17 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>[email protected] wrote:
> >> >>> On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 15:38:34 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> P.Schuman wrote:
> >> >>>>>> Keynote is over, Apple.com has been updated:
> >> >>>>>> http://www.apple.com/iphone/
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>> It's listed as a GSM device,
> >> >>>>> so probably only for Cingular for widest customer base.
> >> >>>> The strangest thing is that it's not 3G. It's only EDGE.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Ummm.. It's also WiFi 802.11c and g
> >> >>
> >> >>Yes, but why wouldn't they include 3G so that it can use Cingular's
> >> >>HSDPA networks. EDGE is too slow. The original reports on the iPhone
> >> >>said that there would be two versions, a lower cost EDGE version, and a
> >> >>higher cost 3G version. Maybe the 3G version is the follow-on product,
> >> >>but spending $600 for a phone without 3G is ludicrous.
> >> >
> >> > Its not just a phone, its all of a Blackberry, an iPod, a PDA, a
> >> > phone, and a true html browser that fits in your pocket at 5 ounces..
> >> > Name another phone that dioes Google Maps.
> >> >
> >> > They are hints and rumors that 3G and GPS are
> >> > on the way, whether that can be done by firmware upgrade or next years
> >> > model isn't clear yet.
> >>
> >> To me a phone like this with all it's functionality should allow you to
> >> install programs for it to be a pocket pc. According to several sources,
> >> it
> >> is a closed system (like the iPod) and the only functionality you'll get
> >> is
> >> whatever Apple gives to you. Definitely not for power users, but
> >> probably
> >> perfect for all the people who prefer Apple to run their iLives.
> >>
> > Unless you buy a PDA, all the phones are "closed."
>
> Which is exactly what I was referring to, there is no comparing the iPhone
> to a standard cell phone, even something like the Choclate or the enV. The
> iPhone is competing with Blackberry's (closed systems) and PPCs (open
> system). I do own a PDA, and I enjoy putting whatever I want on there
> (limited to the amount of memory I have of course). There is easily a
> market for this nice looking phone, but it's not revolutionary.
>
I have a Treo 650 and I'd switch to get what the Apple unit offers. No
love lost. If the reality is close to the hype, I'm there.

--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"

In article <[email protected]>,
ru2b12 <[email protected]> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Edgar wrote:
> > > "Kurt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > >> In article <[email protected]>,
> > >> "Edgar" <ecamacho4_nospam@nospam_hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > >>> news:[email protected]...
> > >>>> On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 17:05:17 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> [email protected] wrote:
> > >>>>>> On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 15:38:34 -0800, SMS
> > >>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> P.Schuman wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> Keynote is over, Apple.com has been updated:
> > >>>>>>>>> http://www.apple.com/iphone/
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> It's listed as a GSM device,
> > >>>>>>>> so probably only for Cingular for widest customer base.
> > >>>>>>> The strangest thing is that it's not 3G. It's only EDGE.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Ummm.. It's also WiFi 802.11c and g
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Yes, but why wouldn't they include 3G so that it can use
> > >>>>> Cingular's HSDPA networks. EDGE is too slow. The original reports
> > >>>>> on the iPhone said that there would be two versions, a lower cost
> > >>>>> EDGE version, and a higher cost 3G version. Maybe the 3G version
> > >>>>> is the follow-on product, but spending $600 for a phone without
> > >>>>> 3G is ludicrous.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Its not just a phone, its all of a Blackberry, an iPod, a PDA, a
> > >>>> phone, and a true html browser that fits in your pocket at 5
> > >>>> ounces.. Name another phone that dioes Google Maps.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> They are hints and rumors that 3G and GPS are
> > >>>> on the way, whether that can be done by firmware upgrade or next
> > >>>> years model isn't clear yet.
> > >>>
> > >>> To me a phone like this with all it's functionality should allow
> > >>> you to install programs for it to be a pocket pc. According to
> > >>> several sources, it
> > >>> is a closed system (like the iPod) and the only functionality
> > >>> you'll get is
> > >>> whatever Apple gives to you. Definitely not for power users, but
> > >>> probably
> > >>> perfect for all the people who prefer Apple to run their iLives.
> > >>>
> > >> Unless you buy a PDA, all the phones are "closed."
> > >
> > > Which is exactly what I was referring to, there is no comparing the
> > > iPhone to a standard cell phone, even something like the Choclate or
> > > the enV. The iPhone is competing with Blackberry's (closed systems)
> > > and PPCs (open system). I do own a PDA, and I enjoy putting whatever
> > > I want on there (limited to the amount of memory I have of course).
> > > There is easily a market for this nice looking phone, but it's not
> > > revolutionary.
> > > --
> > > Edgar
> >
> > Good or bad, mobile devices have become little more than pocket vending
> > machines selling impulse products. As such, a mobile iPod is simply an
> > extension of the tethered iPod with even more product selection and is
> > sure to be a hit with the 14-29 demographic. In this whole thread,
> > nobody has even mentioned a concern for call quality and fidelity or
> > reception capabilities - things that old farts like me put first.
>
> We all want quality and when we can get our hands on the iPhone,
> each will determine for themselves if it falls into that category.
> I tell ya, apple must be on the right track if they can get an old fart
> like you fired up! Relax old man, step away from the rotary dial. ;-)

The quality issue is paramount with me. Plus, the regualar Cingular
phones generally have the most god-awful, unintuitive interface designs.
Apple trumps everyone in this department.

--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"

In article <[email protected]>,
Kurt <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> Unless you buy a PDA, all the phones are "closed."

It depends on what you mean by "closed". With Sprint, for example, you
can get developer documentation and tools for free, by joining their
free developer program. You can then write Java programs, and download
them to many (most?) of their non-PDA phones. The programs do not have
to be downloaded through Sprint or signed by them.

However, the programs do not have full access to the phone. If you
wanted to do something like, say, a replacement for the phone's address
book, or a replacement for its ring system, or something like that, I
don't think you could.

--
--Tim Smith

ru2b12 wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
<snip>>
>> Good or bad, mobile devices have become little more than pocket
>> vending machines selling impulse products. As such, a mobile iPod is
>> simply an extension of the tethered iPod with even more product
>> selection and is sure to be a hit with the 14-29 demographic. In
>> this whole thread, nobody has even mentioned a concern for call
>> quality and fidelity or reception capabilities - things that old
>> farts like me put first.
>
> We all want quality and when we can get our hands on the iPhone,
> each will determine for themselves if it falls into that category.
> I tell ya, apple must be on the right track if they can get an old
> fart like you fired up!
>
>Relax old man, step away from the rotary
> dial. ;-)

But the iPod already has a rotary dial - the "click wheel!"
I'm not all that fired up but only because it's an Apple product. The
one experience I had with an iPod Mini convinced me that they consider
customers to merely be an annoyance when it comes to honoring
warranties. I won't go into detail here but 4 returns for the same
repeatedly unfixed problem is just too much to take. The biggest
benefit to their announcement is that the slick interface and features -
which indeed look very nice - will soon be copied by other manufacturers
who respect their customers with products that will actually work the
way WE want them to.

Larry wrote:
> Thanks! My buddy's little girl got a Nano for Christmas. I'll see if I
> can get her downloaded MP3s working on it this weekend.

Although I personally don't own an iPod, I'm pretty sure they play mp3s
natively. You're not the only person to think that iPod's don't play
mp3s, I've had other friends with that misconception too. Although part
of the blame can be placed on apple, the first generation could not,
and that stigma stuck with them. Also due to the fact that apple
probably downplays the fact that they play mp3s, so that people will
buy songs from iTunes.

On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 07:23:17 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
imagined:

>P.Schuman wrote:
>>> Keynote is over, Apple.com has been updated:
>>> http://www.apple.com/iphone/
>>>
>> It's listed as a GSM device,
>> so probably only for Cingular for widest customer base.
>
>I was in BJ's, next to Apple's campus in Cupertino, about six months ago
>and I overheard some Apple people talking about the iPhone, and Verizon.
>They had pitched it to Verizon, but Verizon made some unacceptable demands:
>
>1. Bluetooth needed to be disabled, except for the headset.
>2. Music could only be downloaded from Verizon's music service
>3. WiFi would be disabled anytime the device detected Verizon's network
>4. The OS would have to be Windows Embedded
>5. Every photo taken would have to be immediately transferred across
>Verizon's network
>6. No roaming onto any non-Verizon CDMA network, even at extra cost


You sure took good notes about what you "overheard". If it was true,
any of them could have been fired for such loose lips. And Apple
will come after you if any of this is true. Likely story.
Take your dream fantasies elsewhere.

The phone was GSM long ago, and so I fail to believe that 6 months ago
it might have switched to CDMA (with extra cost from Qualcom).

Cingular made zero restrictions on Apple other than a USA exclusivity
through 2008.

==============

Also interesting that Apple, first shot out of the box has a better
PDA/Phone etc, than Microsoft has with Windows CE 5.

At 11 Jan 2007 14:50:25 +0000 [email protected] wrote:

> Also interesting that Apple, first shot out of the box has a better
> PDA/Phone etc, than Microsoft has with Windows CE 5.

Perhaps true, but I find it inteesting that everyone is in love with a
device that they haven't seen or used in person let. I'll bet the Newton
performed admirably at it's staged introduction too! ;-)

Seriously, I'll bet it's a wonderful product, but let's not go too ga-ga
over a unit that is still six months away.


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article <[email protected]>,
Tim Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> Kurt <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > Unless you buy a PDA, all the phones are "closed."
>
> It depends on what you mean by "closed". With Sprint, for example, you
> can get developer documentation and tools for free, by joining their
> free developer program. You can then write Java programs, and download
> them to many (most?) of their non-PDA phones. The programs do not have
> to be downloaded through Sprint or signed by them.
>
> However, the programs do not have full access to the phone. If you
> wanted to do something like, say, a replacement for the phone's address
> book, or a replacement for its ring system, or something like that, I
> don't think you could.

Yes, since most cell phone users are also developers fluent in writing
code, I see your compelling argument.

--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"

In article <[email protected]>,
Kurt <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Tim Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > Kurt <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > Unless you buy a PDA, all the phones are "closed."
> >
> > It depends on what you mean by "closed". With Sprint, for example, you
> > can get developer documentation and tools for free, by joining their
> > free developer program. You can then write Java programs, and download
> > them to many (most?) of their non-PDA phones. The programs do not have
> > to be downloaded through Sprint or signed by them.
> >
> > However, the programs do not have full access to the phone. If you
> > wanted to do something like, say, a replacement for the phone's address
> > book, or a replacement for its ring system, or something like that, I
> > don't think you could.
>
> Yes, since most cell phone users are also developers fluent in writing
> code, I see your compelling argument.

Perhaps you could explain what you mean by "closed", then? The usual
meaning is that developers other than the original company or those
specifically authorized by them can develop applications for a device,
and users can install those applications.

--
--Tim Smith

How do you know they have the exclusive thru 2008? That sounds like a long
time. If it's true, they must have paid Apple big time for this.

Mike Schumann

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 07:23:17 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
> imagined:
>
>>P.Schuman wrote:
>>>> Keynote is over, Apple.com has been updated:
>>>> http://www.apple.com/iphone/
>>>>
>>> It's listed as a GSM device,
>>> so probably only for Cingular for widest customer base.
>>
>>I was in BJ's, next to Apple's campus in Cupertino, about six months ago
>>and I overheard some Apple people talking about the iPhone, and Verizon.
>>They had pitched it to Verizon, but Verizon made some unacceptable
>>demands:
>>
>>1. Bluetooth needed to be disabled, except for the headset.
>>2. Music could only be downloaded from Verizon's music service
>>3. WiFi would be disabled anytime the device detected Verizon's network
>>4. The OS would have to be Windows Embedded
>>5. Every photo taken would have to be immediately transferred across
>>Verizon's network
>>6. No roaming onto any non-Verizon CDMA network, even at extra cost
>
>
> You sure took good notes about what you "overheard". If it was true,
> any of them could have been fired for such loose lips. And Apple
> will come after you if any of this is true. Likely story.
> Take your dream fantasies elsewhere.
>
> The phone was GSM long ago, and so I fail to believe that 6 months ago
> it might have switched to CDMA (with extra cost from Qualcom).
>
> Cingular made zero restrictions on Apple other than a USA exclusivity
> through 2008.
>
> ==============
>
> Also interesting that Apple, first shot out of the box has a better
> PDA/Phone etc, than Microsoft has with Windows CE 5.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article <[email protected]>,
Tim Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> Kurt <[email protected]> wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > Tim Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <[email protected]>,
> > > Kurt <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > Unless you buy a PDA, all the phones are "closed."
> > >
> > > It depends on what you mean by "closed". With Sprint, for example, you
> > > can get developer documentation and tools for free, by joining their
> > > free developer program. You can then write Java programs, and download
> > > them to many (most?) of their non-PDA phones. The programs do not have
> > > to be downloaded through Sprint or signed by them.
> > >
> > > However, the programs do not have full access to the phone. If you
> > > wanted to do something like, say, a replacement for the phone's address
> > > book, or a replacement for its ring system, or something like that, I
> > > don't think you could.
> >
> > Yes, since most cell phone users are also developers fluent in writing
> > code, I see your compelling argument.
>
> Perhaps you could explain what you mean by "closed", then? The usual
> meaning is that developers other than the original company or those
> specifically authorized by them can develop applications for a device,
> and users can install those applications.

I see your point, though I also see Apple eventually allowing apps to be
written. I don't see them doing anything that would compromise the
integrity of the interface.

--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"

[email protected] wrote:

> You sure took good notes about what you "overheard". If it was true,
> any of them could have been fired for such loose lips. And Apple
> will come after you if any of this is true. Likely story.
> Take your dream fantasies elsewhere.

It was intended as humor to illustrate how Verizon forces manufacturers
to de-feature their phones before Verizon will sell them. Do you really
think Verizon wants to market any handset that lets users escape from
their network for any tasks?

It is alleged that Larry claimed:

> > You can definitely play native MP3s on all current iPods.
>
> Thanks! My buddy's little girl got a Nano for Christmas. I'll see if I
> can get her downloaded MP3s working on it this weekend.

Where were they downloaded from? If they are "rights protected" music
(Napster, eMusic, etc) then they will not play on the iPod. At all.
They will play on players from anyone else, though.

There are two mutually incompatible rights management schemes in use,
one from Microsoft and one from Apple, and music locked with one will
not work on the other's players. Guess which one the iPod uses.

Rhapsody is the only online store I know of that offers music in either
format, but you cannot choose on the fly, you need to set it as an
account preference. iTunes is Apple only, Napster, etc, are MS only.

Unprotected mp3s can be used on any player.

wma tracks, protected or not, will only work on players designed to
work with the MS rights scheme.

NOTE: I mention wma mainly because a lot of people don't actually
realize that music purchased from Napster, etc, is wma not mp3, and
music purchased from iTunes is some variant of acc, not mp3. The mp3
format does not actually have provisions for digital rights management.

--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol

"As governor of Texas, I have set high standards for our public
schools, and I have met those standards." - George W. Bush, Aug 30,
2000

"Cyrus Afzali" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 17:26:55 -0700, Todd Allcock
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>At 10 Jan 2007 13:58:29 -0800 Edgar wrote:
>>
>>> non-replaceable batteries,
>>
>>A poor choice, IMO as well, but frankly it's sometimes necessary on small
>>devices, where the battery compartment and spring loaded connectors can
>>waste precious space. It's an owner convenience vs. a little more
>>battery life issue. (Well, in this case it was probably a "doesn't it
>>look even sleeker without a removeable battery door" issue!)
>
> Obviously I can't speak to the iPhone since it's not out, but it's a
> bit of a misnomer that the iPod has irreplaceable batteries. The
> better way to say that is batteries that can't easily be replaced by
> the end user. FWIW, I've had my second-generation iPod since 2004, use
> it a great deal, and the battery's still kicking.
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>

But isn't there a market right now for people carrying around spare
batteries to be able to continue to use their phone even after the first has
died. All of my creative MP3 players have had replaceable batteries (by the
user) and I have bought extra in order to keep the music going. I'd rather
have the choice personally, but again IMO.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com