Re: iPhone
 

Well, here's my view of the iPhone (based on the hype, as I haven't used one yet).

The multi-touch display: Excellent. A real innovation.

The "virtual keyboard": Anyone who has used one of these will have already come to the conclusion they are a bad idea. Apple's is the same as any other, but the keys appear to grow when you touch them. TBH, I can't see how this is any real use, and it may be irritating. A physical keyboard (or keypad) is far better. Virtual keyboards are a major handicap when texting.

Visual voicemail: How much will this *actually* help anyone? It might save you a couple of minutes per call, but how many times do you call your voicemail each day?

Texting: Now, I personally don't think the "Conversation" style of organisation works for email (which is why I don't like Gmail). I really don't see how it will be any better when texting. Also, how often do you have a text "conversation"?

Lack of software: Using the excuse that installing the wrong software will stop you being able to make calls is, in my experience, wrong. Any well designed Phone OS will prevent software you install from stopping you make calls. Also his excuse about it being able to bring down the network is also, in my experience, wrong. If ANY network's security is weak enough that one app can bring it down, then, TBH, they will have other problems, and I don't want to subscribe to that phone company.

The scrolly list thingy. Very pretty, but my phone does a similar job (probably with less effort and a lot more accurately) with a wheel on it's side.

The "Home" button. Admittedly, a lot of phones don't have this, but some get near. Symbian UIQ phones (such as the Sony Ericsson P range) have a row of icons along the top, and Windows Mobile phones have a start menu, Both of which are accessible most of the time. Also, in my experience, pressing the "Hang Up" button usually closes any software you are using.

The Music player: While I like cover art (and have it enabled on both iTunes and my iPod), it is eye candy. The Coverflow feature on iTunes is OK, but in my experience, sometimes mixes tracks from different albums. I suspect the iPhone will do the same. As for organisation, well, the iPhone appears to lack something the iPod also lacks. A decent search system. Admittedly, I haven't seen an MP3 player with a proper search yet (although the Creative Jukebox 3 with the latest firmware comes pretty close).

Also, I'd like to know what music formats the iPhone can use. As phones don't come with hard drives, I try to use the most compact format possible for music on my phone. At the moment, this is OGG. Apple are unlikely to support this on the iPhone.

One final thing I'd like to know: Does the iPhone support memory cards. If not, why not? I personally don't believe a phone is an adequate replacement for a camera, but a lot of people do, and they aren't always going to have access to a computer when their phone memory is full, and they want to take more photos.

Re: iPhone
 

Apple & Cisco have reached an agreement on the iPhone name...

Re: iPhone
 

I take it you dont think wm5 is well designed then?
from the xda through several phones to the m3100 I currently own..
I love the functionality.. but do the apps ever get in the way of the phone?
about 10 times a day usualiy!
sorry but if the iphone gets round that fundamental flaw.. I am having one!
simbian is fine.. had the p800 p900 p910i and even an a920 (yuck)
great phones lousy PDA's (but at least they didnt crash anywhere near as often as all my windows based phones have!)
just my 2p!

Re: iPhone
 

I don't think WM5 is well designed. I did have problems with reliabilty, until, one day I did a manufacturer's reset. Now it doesn't crash that often. Well, it did when I installed Minimo (mobile firefox) on it, but I put that down to problems within minimo.

TBH, if you can't install software on it, IMO, you'd be better off with a non-smartphone. Most phone's have PDAs nowdays, and most have MP3 players, and even assuming they are not free, they will cost a *lot* less than the iPhone. Ok, so you won't be able scroll through your cover artwork, but that is a minor feature.

Re: iPhone
 

Hurrah!

Although I won't get this (cost mainly), I think its a much-needed move. Jobs doesn't like this sort of thing, but I think he realised that 3rd party support is needed to help maintain the life of a device (think of an OS with no 3rd party apps!"

Hopefully its less restricted than the usual stock quotes/weather report widgets.

Re: iPhone
 

It's a brave move for Apple. I fully expect there to be an online marketplace for widgets to download to your iPhone, not unlike the way you download tracks for your iPod. I don't know whether they plan it to be fully web-based, or client based (maybe they'll extend iTunes, and maybe they'll finally have to re-name it), but I'm sure it'll happen, and I'm sure that until recently they hoped to have a tight stranglehold on what you could buy through it (more profits for Apple).

Fair dos to them for listening to the concerns of their potential customers, although I still doubt very much that adding widgets to your iPhone will be as free an experience as, say, syncing new apps to a Palm device. We may now get third-party add-ons, but they are unlikely to be avaiable for free and they will almost certainly be delivered by an online service controlled by Apple.

Re: iPhone
 

Lord Jobs giveth, Lord Jobs taketh away.

So stock quotes and weather reports it is then.

I guess there will be some effort to flash Linux on there, but I don't know how successful it will be.

Re: iPhone
 

I personally think that IF the iPhone succeeds, it will be purely because of hype.

As I said earlier, the features are OK (although I don't like virtual keyboards - they suck no matter how pretty you make them), but apart from the multi touch screen, I don't think the iPhone has good hardware.

It certainly lacks 3G or Wifi support, which may limit it's appeal outside America.

As for Web 2.0 being available. Well, I am yet to be convinced that Web 2.0 has an actual use on any platform. Yes, it has a lot of nice features, and the interactivity of things like MySpace is good, but I haven't seen much use that has any real point.

OK, Google are porting their apps to it. Google maps on a mobile is good, and actually does have a point, but it requires a fast data connection and really needs a tarrif such as Web'n'walk to keep the cost down. AFAIK, you can only get these tarrifs on 3g networks in this country (iPhone has no 3g support).

Google are also porting their word processor and spreadsheet apps to the iPhone. Whoopee! I've had various phones/PDAs with Office style apps on for nearly ten years now. I can count the number of times I've used the apps on my fingers. Phones (whatever their hard/software) are not practical for this kind of use. They are to small, and the lack of an actual keyboard is a MASSIVE handicap for this kind of use.

Re: iPhone
 

It works fine on my Samsung D600 on 2.5G* and T-mobiles capped £1 a day data tarriff.

I used it the other day to get somewhere, it was great!:tu:

A little slow but I was walking so not so much a problem :monkey:

Re: iPhone
 

It has wifi support....

Also the UK version will have 3g built in.. (or so they say)

Re: iPhone
 

Well, they kind of do. Steve Jobs has hinted that Apple are aware of the 3G problem. Also the iPhone will be missing a lot of features if they cannot use 3G, i think the only network to support EDGE access is Orange in the UK so they may get the iPhone.

As for features I think the iPhone has some excellent features but it is missing the basics. There is a lot of cool technology in there and it will be good when they get some of the old technology in there as well. Apple can make multiple revisions of the iPhone like the iPod so hopefully these issues will be addressed. Then I might buy one.

Re: iPhone
 

More problems with the iPhone..

Wi-fi will be tied into phone plan

iPhone unavailable for business users.

iPhone might have Flash, but won't support Java

And still no word on how much the monthly plans will cost, just two weeks from release.

Apple isn't covering itself with glory at the moment.

Re: iPhone
 

The Wi-Fi feature isnt too bad since a lot of the features require it. Why buy a iPhone without a data plan/EDGE

Re: iPhone
 

First we had Ramrod, destroyer of servers... Now we have iPhone, destroyer of wireless LANs

That's some DOS capability. Buy a couple of iPhones and take down people's WLANs with it.

Re: iPhone
 

Rather ironically, considering what Steve said in Chris's quote, security researches have discovered MAJOR flaws in the security on the Iphone..

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/07...vulnerability/

It seems that ALL the apps run as admin, and it's entirely possible for a malicious website to access your contacts, SMS messages and most other areas of the phone.

---------- Post added at 10:24 ---------- Previous post was at 10:20 ----------

Further to the above, it seems that the problem here is that the Iphone, given an SSID for a wireless network, will happily try and attach to ALL the access points with that SSID.

Re: iPhone
 

Will the iPhone be released in the UK, and if so when? Also will it be on Pay as you go? I'm with Orange btw.

Re: iPhone
 

It will be at some point. No one has said when. It's also unlikely to be available on Pay as you go (and, TBH, I dread to think how much it would cost: It's $600 on contract in the USA), and the last rumour I heard suggested that O2 were the front runners to get exclusive rights.

Re: iPhone
 

Contract in the US gives very little handset subsidy. You might get $50-100, but nothing like the phones you get for free in the UK. I would expect it to be in the 150-200GBP range in the UK.

Re: iPhone
 

True, but in my experience, Apple tend to use an exchange rate of 1$=1£

Re: iPhone
 

Re: iPhone
 

Want an iPhone? Going on holiday?

Better leave it at home :eek:

Re: iPhone
 

Apple strikes back at the hackers....
BBC
An Apple software update is disabling iPhones that have been unlocked by owners who wanted to choose which mobile network to use.
Earlier this week Apple said a planned update would leave the device "permanently inoperable". "

That should make them popular.

Re: iPhone
 

Not half as popular as this:

Ooops.

Re: iPhone
 

Apple have to be very careful... Deliberately bricking devices, even if they have altered, is illegal.

Still, I don't suppose it will come to anything. Apple have a massive team of a crack, battle-hardened lawyers.

Re: iPhone
 

I'm not surprised they're doing this.

There have been rumours for a while that MS may use it's dashboard update feature on the X360 to brick flashed X360 consoles however given the risk and the fact they are the content stream (via XBL) they don't have to flex their muscles.

Apple however need to prove to the operators that are paying them large fees that they can ensure that the operator continues to benefit from the people that buy an iPhone - especially in this country where the operators subsidise the handset costs. O2 won't be too happy to subsidise an iPhone that then generates T-Mobile revenue because somebody unlocked it.

Re: iPhone
 

Don't know how it is going to work in the UK because you sign up on iTunes here but this is largely irrelevant in the normal sense of phones and contracts. Just because you have unlocked the phone and are using it on another network does not get you out of the original contract. To exit that contract you would need to pay the appropriate exit fees, usually 18months minimum monthly payments. If that happens they make the subsidy back. Then O2 make money doing nothing and TMobile make money for coverage.

I thought the EU required that networks unlocked handsets at the end of contracts for a small fee. After all you are not tied to a contract and you bought the phone so they no longer have any leverage over how you should use it. Won't Apple / O2 be required to unlock these babys in 18 months anyway?

Re: iPhone
 

You won't get out of the original contract, but the operator will still consider it a loss of revenue as they won't get the minutes/texts/data bills that you might have got had you stepped over your contracted allowances. I'd guess the iPhone would be considered as a greater potential loss because of the chargeable content they'll be wanting you to take on it.

Not sure about the EU side of things, but I suspect iPhone 2 or whatever it is will be out then and be being pushed as the new thing to have.

Re: iPhone
 

I'm not sure that this is how it works with the iPhone. You buy the handset from Apple/O2/CPW, but you activate it via iTunes, and it is in the activation that you are required to enter into the contract with O2.

http://www.carphonewarehouse.com/com...C.APPLE.IPHONE

(click 'Basic Requirements' link for a popup).

If you can unlock the phone and therefore never go through the official iTunes Activation, you will have opened the handset up to use on another network without ever signing up with O2 for anything.

At least, from the wording at Carphone Warehouse, that's how it looks to me.

Re: iPhone
 

With the American one I think there was a get out period from the contract.

Re: iPhone
 

Thats how it works here. So who is subsidising this handset? Apple / CPW / o2? It could be Apple which is why they want 40% of the revenue stream.

---------- Post added at 14:05 ---------- Previous post was at 13:18 ----------

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7017660.stm
The iDoorStop prophecy has come true - apparently for some non hacked handsets also.

Re: iPhone
 

I don't get how the iphone is supposed to be massively subsidised.

The ipod touch which must contain almost the same hardware less the phone bit is £199 the iphone is £70 dearer for the same 8gb model. Most mobiles are subsidised by upwards of £200. This money I'm betting gets paid to apple along with a portion of the contract money.

Re: iPhone
 

Woman sues Apple over iPhone price cut...

Link

She hasn't got a snowball's chance!

Re: iPhone
 

She seems to be forgetting that nobody put a gun to her head and forced her to buy the iPhone or sign up with AT&T.

Re: iPhone
 

Does anyone else find it rather odd that if Microsoft did something like this (or, indeed, half the stuff Apple do), they would be accused of anti competitive practices (see the recent case between Google and Microsoft over the Vista search for evidence) and possibly taken to court, yet Apple, because they seem to be percieved as a nice company, get away with it?

Re: iPhone
 

Apple are like Virgin in many ways. They are the anti-company. They are multi-billion dollar corporations masquarding as small independent companies with charasmatic, young CEOs who are constantly fighting the evil, more conservative, perceived-larger companies. As such they do get away with blue murder.

Like with Virgin. They colluded with BA to fleece customers over fuel supplements. Although they did blow the whistle on it, they still still fleeced thousands of customers over it with no conscience/recompense. Yet BA still look evil and Virgin Atlantic look like heroes.

It constantly amazes me just how anti-consumer Apple can be yet they are still revered. Only since the iPhone have people within the Apple community really been starting to realise.

Re: iPhone
 

I'm not an Apple fan (don't have any iPods, iPhones or general Apple gubbins), but I'm not convinced they have done anything particularly evil in this instance. They offered a partial refund for the difference after the price drop which is more than most companies would have done. Admittedly I'm a but dubious about the speed with which the 4GB model was canned - why bother with it in the first place?

Everyone seems to be focussing on Apple as the culprits when, as highlighted in the contract (and I quoted above) the real sting is the 2 year contract with AT&T. To be fair, AT&T need to do this to cover the costs that Apple have imposed on them.

The overall cost of the package might be high, but very few new, high profile cutting edge products aren't. I don't see anyone accusing Sony of nasty behaviour for the high price of a PS3.

Re: iPhone
 

The main problem for me is that they virtually halved the price about 60 days after release. The speed suggests they could have made the phone cheaper in the first place. The other problem is they limited the refund to those who had bought the phone within the 14 days prior to the announced price drop.

Apple weren't forced to go with AT&T, and bearing in mind the facilities of the iPhone (hardware wise), combined with the fact that AFAIK, US mobile carriers don't subsidise phones heavily, I doubt AT&T have actually subsidised the phone at all. So, I doubt AT&T have massive costs to cover.


That's just it. Apart from the memory size and the screen, the iPhone isn't cutting edge. Even the much hyped OS is just a pretty interface running on a seven year old OS (Mac OSX). The PS3 has it's faults, but it is arguably cutting edge.

I am not complaining so much about the hardware/software side of Apple (I love Apple hardware and software), but the business side of Apple leaves a lot to be desired.

Re: iPhone
 

The sharp price drop so soon after the release of the phone is fishy I agree - either they were after a large mark up for the first few weeks or somebody needs to be fired for getting the price wrong, but the point was more that Apple were at least offering some people something (despite the catches) when they made the change.

AT&T aren't paying the same high subsidy that O2 probably will, but they are still paying Apple purely for the privilege of using the phone. While it might not have all the latest technology, the lure of an iPhone to switch operators does seem to be working - there are people in the US ditching their old phones and networks in favour of AT&T. Not because AT&T might offer a better service but because they have the iPhone.

Maybe cutting edge was the wrong phrase - the iPhone doesn't even stretch as far as 3G (if memory serves) which means that operators have a higher operating cost to get the content to the phone that they want to make their money from. At the end of the day the whole thing is about working out what people are willing to pay and Apple proved that despite any limitations of the product people are willing to pay over the odds. They're not the only company to do this - our own government proves that point on a regular basis!

Re: iPhone
 

I would imagine they stock piled Iphones which cost a larger amount to produce and with increased production and the reduced cost of components this will have some effect on the cost of making it. Plus I think they figured they would sell even more with the drop.

Re: iPhone
 

The price drop isn't the most heinous example, but they are plenty more, across all Apple products.

Picking one at random, the iPhone doesn't allow custom ringtones. Virtually every phone over at least the last 5 years have had the ability to either record them via the mic, import them, or compose them. If you want a ringtone for your iPhone, you have to buy it from iTunes, even if you have already bought the song for your iPod. So despite buying the song in full, you need to buy another 15 seconds of the same song. And its not about protecting artists, or the like. Its about squatting over the customer and fleecing them because they can.

Re: iPhone
 

Didn't they say in the matrix

Perception is Reality

The Virgin fuel surcharge debacle is an interesting one. Had BA got to the competition commission first (probably hampered by a bigger burocracy) then VS would have been the bad guys and got the $$$$ fine!

This is why Branson and Jobs protect the market image, the apple logo etc so vigourously.

---------- Post added at 09:18 ---------- Previous post was at 09:15 ----------

18m-2y contracts are far more common over here. I don't think many here consider the length of contract to be unusual of excessive.

---------- Post added at 09:28 ---------- Previous post was at 09:18 ----------

14 day prior purchases could return their phone and they buy it again at the lower price, those outside the 14 days got the refund voucher / credit or whatever it was. Everyone with an iPhone got some money back.
US Phone carriers don't subsidies as heavily which is why they can offer $20 unlimited data, they are not trying to recover $300 of handset subsidy over 12 months (at $25 a month) which is how the model works in the UK.
In the final analysis Apple really had little choice of carrier if they were to choose a sole carrier across the US.
Compare
http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer/
to
http://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/
These are really the only two nationwide GSM networks. Then if you want to look further into this and the fact the iPhone is a data device as much as a phone EDGE covereage on ATT/Cingular is also far greater.
Verizon and Sprint/Nextel are not GSM TDMA but CDMA so incompatible with the iPhone handset / GSM infrastructure.
Apple wisely chose to build a GSM phone so it could be rolled out globally.
ATT IMHO had this in the bag (compared to say the UK when all 4 network operators have such similar coverage and network technology there was true competition). If they did not realise this and overpaid they are as dumb as the woman suing Apple over the price of her phone.

Re: iPhone
 

Can't really argue that one! In business terms it's great as you get all of the revenue - how many companies wouldn't like to be able to charge for the same thing several times "legitimately"? In support terms it's also good as you know what's on the phone - particularly when dealing with firmware's and the like (OK, I know that's a whole different story of Apple evilness). In customer terms though it's just crap! I haven't looked but how do the prices compare? Why do I have a feeling that the price of the ringtone is actually more expensive than the price of the whole song?

They're starting to become pretty pervasive but I wouldn't go so far as to say common. At least in the UK the operators have a (somewhat wobbly) leg to stand on when trying to justify it. In this instance the high rates that AT&T agreed to pay Apple provide the same wobbly leg. (And of course $11 a month over a 2 year contract is better than over a 1 year contract for Apple too - hence Apple's incentive to keep phones locked to the network.)

Re: iPhone
 

In the US the higher cost for content is not really there. 3G is still considered a business service and built out in areas where there are high numbers of business / blackberrys.
http://www.wireless.att.com/coverage.../popUp_3g.html
To compare to the UK it would be like having 3G in London, Bristol, Birmingham, Manchester, Glasgow and Edinburgh and maybe on the rail and roads connecting but stray from there and you are back on 2G.
2.75G EDGE is the best nationwide network here.

---------- Post added at 09:41 ---------- Previous post was at 09:32 ----------

This is basic economics or (Economics 101 as they would say here).
Charging the price a market will bear. Early adopters will pay more to be early adopters. The Everett Rogers Diffusion of Innovation theory (from 1962)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_of_innovations

• Innovators – venturesome, educated, multiple info sources;
• Early adopters – social leaders, popular, educated;
• Early majority – deliberate, many informal social contacts;
• Late majority – skeptical, traditional, lower socio-economic status;
• Laggards – neighbours and friends are main info sources, fear of debt.

Innovaters know they will be paying top $ for a product and will pay it so they can say they are first to own it. And will stay up all night outside a store to own it.
Take a look at this page
http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-pho...era-phones.jsp
All prices for 2 year contracts!
I'm using my unlocked K800i so have no tie in at all!

Re: iPhone
 

Because it does :)

iTunes will provide any 30 seconds of 1,000,000 songs for you for $0.99 each.

Now if you own the song in iTunes already, you pay $0.99 for Apple to ringtone-ify it. Something I presume happens instantly on the fly and doesn't really cost them anything.

Now, if you don't own the song, and just want a ringtone, you have to buy it in iTunes first for $0.99 and then pay the ringtone fee of another $0.99 for the grand sum of $1.98.

As I said, how Jobs has the balls to get away with it and sleep and night, I really don't know. He gets away with it legally because its stipulated in the EULA so he can charge what he wants, but it suprises me how many in the Mac community just keep supporting it.

Source

*turns to camera 2* In other news...

You can't keep a good hacker down

Re: iPhone
 

They do not, if you look at most Apple Commentary sites and blogs you will find the ringtone issue is unpopular and applications have been developed that allows you to use your own ringtones from your songs without paying Apple. They are also angry AT the lack of a SDK for the iPhone.

I rarely see evidence of your popular stereotype of Mac users defending everything Apple does outside of forums populated by 13-year olds.

---------- Post added at 16:23 ---------- Previous post was at 16:19 ----------

I think referring to OSX as a seven-year OS is unfair. OSX doesnt have a traditional software cycle and it's worth considering a 10.x upgrade as a full OS upgrade. So much has changed since 10.1. A whole bunch of new API's for developers as well as 64 bit and Mutli-Core support (and the continuing UNIX changes) and much much more and thats before we even mention end-user features such as Expose and Spotlight. The only reason they call them 10.x is for marketing...

Re: iPhone
 

With your background and experience of Macs, I'm genuinely amazed to see you posting something quite as misleading as this!

Re: iPhone
 

They have built a ringtone editor into the new version of itunes. You can use this to select the (up to 30 seconds) portion of the tune to use as a ringtone. You can try this as many times as you like to get the right bit and if you then want to purchase it you can and it will appear in the ringtones section of itunes and sync to your iphone. Almost all of the tunes can be used and have a marker on the letting you know. Tunes you already have purchased that are sat in itunes will also get this marker if they are ringtone compatible.

Re: iPhone
 

I do actually and I resent the implication. I read amongst others, Mac Rumours, ThinkSecret, and cross platform sites such as El Reg and Ars. I have also owned a G4 aluminium powerbook for some years. You should have noticed I have posted links to blogs and sites in this thread and the other iPhone thread.

Just because you don't like what I say doesn't give you the right to call me uneducated and uninformed.

And now we down to insults. Sad really, especially when you haven't read post 135...

Re: iPhone
 

So how does that work with a song that you have ripped to iTunes from a CD, or say something like a Beatles song or any other song that may not currently be available on iTunes.

Re: iPhone
 

It doesn't. The ringtone has to be on a pre-approved list of songs.

Re: iPhone
 

I'm liking my k800i more every day. The k850 with a 5mp camera global 3g and an acceleratometer or whatever the widgit is that tells the screen to turn automatically is looking better everyday.

Re: iPhone
 

Didn't mean any disrespect to OSX. I love it as an OS (does a lot of things very nicely, and scales to low end hardware better than Windows).

Re: iPhone
 

I'm not looking for respect - just accuracy.

OSX is not a seven year old OS any more than Windows is a 12-year-old OS. When Apple got to ten, they changed the naming convention. 'Ten' is now a brand name, not a version number. We are actually on version 4 of 'Oh-Es-Ten', with version five soon to be released.

Each new release of the OS comes on average 12-24 months after the preceeding one, and that strategy, of producing more frequent, but less radical revisions, is one some have suggested MS should be adopting with Windows in the wake of the Vista debacle.

Re: iPhone
 

To add to Chris T's remarks, Microsoft are, or at least there was talk, of them adopting a cycle of more Windows releases that are less radical. Ideally, they wanted to do a release every 2 years...

---------- Post added at 21:53 ---------- Previous post was at 21:43 ----------

Well where is the evidence of:
Mac Rumors and Ars Technica are quite balanced. Mac Rumors rarely offers any commentry and instead sticks to posting news/rumors while Ars is completely balanced and certainly does not keep defending Apple. Think Secret are a rumor site. Cocoa Developers and other serious Mac users dislike Apples policy on many things.

Sorry but that was not a insult. It was a honest comment, that most of the Mac defend-everything-Apple fanatics tend to reside in forums and not anywhere people would take seriously. Maybe Pogue at the New York Times might be ultra-defensive of Apple.

Also, why make your comment

If in post 135 you do mention that people are waking to some of Apples bad-business? The crap with the iPhone is quite a annoyance with the 'Mac community' and before that it was the perception that Apple was ignoring the Mac business in favour of the iPod business, which sort of died down after the Intel-Switch.

I not sure what else you want? Obviously Macs are liked by the community and they are not going to desend into constant bashing of products they like.