Apple's New Calling: The iPhone

"Mij Adyaw" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> Apple may have made a serious mistake in not offering the phone on
> America's Most Reliable Network. It is interesting that they chose GSM
> rather than the technically superior CDMA.

Technicalities are less important than business issues here.

Verizon would never resell a phone that doesn't have its UI mangled to
look just like all of Verizon's phones. And they'd force Apple to
cripple the BT and WiFi connectivity. By the time Verizon got done
mandating their changes, you wouldn't want the result.

The Time aricle (see the original post in this thread) quotes Jobs
saying this (in more diplomatic language.)

-- David

---

› See More: Apple's New Calling: The iPhone

Tim McNamara wrote:

> T-Mobile uses GSM and has probably the best world coverage.

T-Mobile's problem is that there are two many areas in the U.S. where
their coverage is poor, by virtue of their late entry, and their 1900
MHz network. I.e., at my house, in a very urban part of Silicon Valley,
about one mile from Apple's campus, there is no T-Mobile coverage.
They've been fighting to put in a tower for about six years now
(Cingular started, and then when Cingular sold the 1900 MHz network to
T-Mobile, T-Mobile took over the fight...a friend of mine, whose house
backs up to where the tower would go, has been leading the successful
fight against the tower). I used to have no Cingular coverage, now I
have mediocre Cingular coverage, and no T-Mobile coverage. T-Mobile is
at least upfront about it, they check addresses and then if there is no
coverage they advise you against purchasing their service.

With Cingular GSM, you can get all the world coverage that T-Mobile
offers, though you may pay a bit more for international coverage on
other T-Mobile networks outside the U.S., than T-Mobile USA customers
pay (not sure of this actually).

> That's pretty much what what people said about the iPod. Too bad that
> was such a market failure. You'd think Apple would learn from their
> mistakes. :-)

I'd compare the iPhone more to the Newton. Cool technology, but enough
gotchas to limit its appeal. No 3G, only available on a poor network,
and less capability than PDA phones, though a much cooler design. But
not to worry, the first version of any product has always got some
design issues. In a couple of years there may be a CDMA version, and a
GSM version with 3G, as well as a way to load applications onto it.

In article <[email protected]>,
Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:
> At 10 Jan 2007 17:15:08 -0600 Tim McNamara wrote:
>
> > T-Mobile uses GSM and has probably the best world coverage. Would have
> > been a much better choice than Cingular, and I'd have jumped on an
> > iPhone as soon as they became available if it came with T-Mobile service
>
> Cingular has what, 50 million customers vs. T-Mo's 20? Cingular also has
> a higher ARPU (roughly translating into a more affluent customer base
> able to support selling a $500-600 phone) and has a presence in more
> markets than T-Mo.
> In addition, the timing is just right for Cingular- the press buzz will
> make this a great flagship phone to coincide with the rebranding to AT&T-
> I suspect we'll see a lot of "a new phone for the new AT&T"-type
> advertising.

The fact that Apple already had worked with Cingular on a phone probably
was a factor, too--the Motorola ROKR. Apple was pleased with the
collaboration with Cingular on that. It was Motorola that screwed that
phone up, not Cingular.

--
--Tim Smith

In article <[email protected]>,
Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:

> IMHO, Apple is very form (including ease-of-use) over substance-
> iPods aren't the best spec'd MP3 players out there, but they've got
> the style and ergonomics down better than everyone else.

Apple understands that people don't use specifications. People objects
and tools. The user experience is what satisfies the user. Most people
couldn't care less about the specs as long as the user experience is
good- it's just the geeks who look under the hood.

In article <[email protected]>,
Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:

> At 10 Jan 2007 15:07:11 +0000 [email protected] wrote:
>
>
> > You apparently haven't been reading a fair cross section of reviews...
> >
>
> Good reviews won't make a $500 phone more attractive to those not willing
> to spend half a grand on a phone. It will certainly be a success, but
> not a RAZR-like success, at least not at first.
>
But the Razr is a crap phone. Tons of user complaints.

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

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (David C.)
wrote:

>
> My employer doesn't allow you to take pictures on-site, but they don't
> have a problem with merely posessing a camera. So my RAZR doesn't get
> me in trouble.

Problem when you work in a gym.

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

In article <[email protected]>,
Roger Johnstone <[email protected]> wrote:

> In <[email protected]> SMS wrote:
> >
> > The reaction to the iPhone by people they interviewed was almost
> > always the same. Very cool, too expensive, and they wouldn't buy one
> > for $500 or $600. If the price comes down to $300-400, then Apple
> > will have a winner.
>
> That is exactly the same comment many people, including reviewers, made
> when the iPod first came out. "Very cool, too expensive." And the same
> thing will probably happen this time around: it's so cool that people
> will buy them at the high price, and Apple won't be able to keep up with
> the initial demand. In a couple of years the 3rd generation iPhone with
> 32GB of flash, WiMax, and a second camera pointing the correct way for
> video calling, will still cost U$600, but the iPhone Classic will be
> available for half that.
>
> A year later Microsoft will introduce the Zune Phone. No one will notice.

Zune is already dying.

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

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

> In article <[email protected]>,
> Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:
> > At 10 Jan 2007 17:15:08 -0600 Tim McNamara wrote:
> >
> > > T-Mobile uses GSM and has probably the best world coverage. Would have
> > > been a much better choice than Cingular, and I'd have jumped on an
> > > iPhone as soon as they became available if it came with T-Mobile service
> >
> > Cingular has what, 50 million customers vs. T-Mo's 20? Cingular also has
> > a higher ARPU (roughly translating into a more affluent customer base
> > able to support selling a $500-600 phone) and has a presence in more
> > markets than T-Mo.
> > In addition, the timing is just right for Cingular- the press buzz will
> > make this a great flagship phone to coincide with the rebranding to AT&T-
> > I suspect we'll see a lot of "a new phone for the new AT&T"-type
> > advertising.
>
> The fact that Apple already had worked with Cingular on a phone probably
> was a factor, too--the Motorola ROKR. Apple was pleased with the
> collaboration with Cingular on that. It was Motorola that screwed that
> phone up, not Cingular.

It was downhill from the Startac for Motorola.

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

Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> IMHO, Apple is very form (including ease-of-use) over substance-
>> iPods aren't the best spec'd MP3 players out there, but they've got
>> the style and ergonomics down better than everyone else.
>
> Apple understands that people don't use specifications. People objects
> and tools. The user experience is what satisfies the user. Most people
> couldn't care less about the specs as long as the user experience is
> good- it's just the geeks who look under the hood.


Speaking of looking under the hood... this is spec'd at 4Gb or 8Gb. Is
this flash memory or hard drive?

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

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

> Tim McNamara wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> IMHO, Apple is very form (including ease-of-use) over substance-
> >> iPods aren't the best spec'd MP3 players out there, but they've got
> >> the style and ergonomics down better than everyone else.
> >
> > Apple understands that people don't use specifications. People objects
> > and tools. The user experience is what satisfies the user. Most people
> > couldn't care less about the specs as long as the user experience is
> > good- it's just the geeks who look under the hood.
>
>
> Speaking of looking under the hood... this is spec'd at 4Gb or 8Gb. Is
> this flash memory or hard drive?

Flash.

--
"That's George Washington, the first president, of course. The interesting thing
about him is that I read three‹three or four books about him last year. Isn't
that interesting?"
- George W. Bush to reporter Kai Diekmann, May 5, 2006

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

> But the Razr is a crap phone. Tons of user complaints.

I like mine fine. It lets me place and receive calls. What more do you
want?

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

> Zune is already dying.

It was dead before it started.

SMS wrote:

> I'd compare the iPhone more to the Newton. Cool technology, but enough
> gotchas to limit its appeal. No 3G, only available on a poor network,

What is the actual market penetration of 3G in general in the United
States (Apple's primary market)?

> and less capability than PDA phones, though a much cooler design. But

Depends what you're trying to do. I have a Blackberry and I use it
almost exclusively for email/SMS, one or two very short phone calls a
week, and a few minutes a week for web browsing, because the web
browser on any cellphone - and Blackberry's is among the best of a bad
bunch - is so annoying. With an iPhone - which I'd jump at if I hadn't
JUST bought an 8GB nano - the browsing time would increase a lot.

Don't forget that if you're in range of a Wifi AP, you jump off the GSM
network for your browsing. Wouldn't surprise me at all if Apple
integrated iChat voice into the Wifi side of it.

I also use the memo feature to make notes of movies I want to get,
passwords and so on.

Looks as if there was an iCal icon on the iPhone, and likely that will
sync with a .mac account. What more do you want out of a PDA?

> design issues. In a couple of years there may be a CDMA version, and a
> GSM version with 3G, as well as a way to load applications onto it.

It's practically certain there already is a way to load apps onto it
via iTunes, just not a way that's available to the end-user hacker.
Cingular - and Apple - want to make money selling downloads, just like
every other carrier.

In article <[email protected]>,
Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:

> At 10 Jan 2007 15:07:11 +0000 [email protected] wrote:
>
>
> > You apparently haven't been reading a fair cross section of reviews...
> >
>
> Good reviews won't make a $500 phone more attractive to those not willing
> to spend half a grand on a phone. It will certainly be a success, but
> not a RAZR-like success, at least not at first.

Well, a 4 GB nano + a subsidized non-Apple smart phone would probably be
$400-500 anyway[1]. Plus, it's clear Apple is building a platform for
the future here. Remember, the first iPod was $400, and everyone said
that was too expensive. And it was, for the mass market, for a device
which most people didn't even realize they wanted at the time. But it
was enough to get things rolling, and prices dropped, and devices got
more compelling, and the iPod eventually became a mass market hit.

[1] Yes, the non-Apple phone would probably technically play music as
well, but most smart phones don't provide anything like the Apple user
experience. Most of the people I know who have smart phones have iPods
as well.

[snip]

--
"That's George Washington, the first president, of course. The interesting thing
about him is that I read three--three or four books about him last year. Isn't
that interesting?"
- George W. Bush to reporter Kai Diekmann, May 5, 2006

In article
<droleary.usenet-D86F29.16063910012007@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
Doc O'Leary <[email protected]> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:

[snip]

> > Anybody think Apple's going to let AT&T silkscreen a blue globe on the
> > back? ;-)
>
> Yeah, branding is going to be a really interesting issue to play out. I
> saw the screen displaying the Cingular name and, honestly, I'd rather
> they tag the back of the phone than take up screen real estate. It's
> not like people are going to be changing carriers so often that we need
> to see it displayed on the top of the screen all the time.

That's not exactly Cingular branding, that's telling you who's network
you're on. Lots of phones do that. If you're roaming, or you manage to
get the phone unlocked and working with another carrier's SIM card,
it'll display something else.

--
"That's George Washington, the first president, of course. The interesting thing
about him is that I read three‹three or four books about him last year. Isn't
that interesting?"
- George W. Bush to reporter Kai Diekmann, May 5, 2006