PDA

View Full Version : Macworld SF 2007 Keynote Notes




MacRumors
Jan 9, 2007, 10:05 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Some notes/commentary surrounding today's announcements:

iPhone Trademark
While it took many by surprise that Apple did indeed use the term "iPhone" to describe their mobile phone after Cisco/Linksys used their US trademark on "iPhone" and launched web-enabled handsets, Reuters reports that Cisco and Apple are close to a deal (http://today.reuters.com/news/articleinvesting.aspx?view=CN&storyID=2007-01-09T190050Z_01_N09161330_RTRIDST_0_APPLE-IPHONE-CISCO-URGENT.XML&rpc=66&type=qcna) regarding the iPhone trademark.

Beatles Played During the Keynote
At 9:58 am, Steve played a song from the Beatles while demoing the iPhone. The Beatles have been noticeably absent from iTunes, however there have been rumors that Apple is close to signing an exclusive agreement (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/11/20061127103829.shtml) to bring the Beatles' catalog into digital distribution via iTunes. Such an agreement was not announced today, but the choice of music was curious nonetheless.

Apple TV USB Connector
When initially previewed, many wondered why the "iTV" (now Apple TV) contained a USB port. According to the Apple TV website (http://www.apple.com/appletv/specs.html), the USB port is for "service and diagnostics" use.

Pictures From Apple's Booth
MacRumors' Arnold Kim was on hand to take high-resolution pictures (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2007/01/20070109220811.shtml) from inside Apple's booth showing the Apple TV demoed and the iPhone being displayed.

Mini OS X
The question on the minds of many developers now that this new stripped down version of OS X will be made available is... can I develop applications for it? So far, the answer has been "no comment" from Apple. However, an interesting note is that the iPhone's display is extremely high-resolution (160 ppi). At WWDC 2006, Apple told developers to begin making their applications "resolution independent (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061221164113.shtml)," a fact that may come to bear should Apple decide to distribute a software development kit.



failsafe1
Jan 9, 2007, 10:08 PM
I see app development on the way. With a device as nice as the phone coming you want your iLife suite on it for sure.

Grimace
Jan 9, 2007, 10:09 PM
The Beatles would make a fantastic addition! Go Steve!

The only thing about the iTV that leaves me cold is that I don't have any video content that I'd want to stream. I play DVDs or watch TV. Maybe showing your photos on a larger display, but it does seem like an expensive Video Airport Express...

Stridder44
Jan 9, 2007, 10:14 PM
On a side note:

I really love the new iPod ads. I'm also wondering if the iPod is going to see the same backing as the iPhone has (the brushed metal kind of thing) instead of the scratch-tacular metal back it has now.


Also, it seems like Apple intends for developers (or anyone really) to make apps for the iPhone. Notice how it has various squares for Notes, Messages, etc. It looks like more could fit in there (kinda like widgets. Dashboard comes with pre-installed nifty apps, but you can get a ton more via online).

sPAULj
Jan 9, 2007, 10:15 PM
I see app development on the way. With a device as nice as the phone coming you want your iLife suite on it for sure.

iLife? No way. You use iLife to make content, not access it. Doing that on such a small device would be abysmal. To be really honest, the only thing I'm disappointed not to see is the ability to download media over wifi/edge. I think it also says a lot abut cingular's hesitancy to fully give control to Apple.

By the way, we were told we would hear about Leopard's "secret" features. What's the deal?

Ha ze
Jan 9, 2007, 10:18 PM
So, here's my take.... ....stop whining


So many people are talking about "this is the day the Mac died." Shut up. As simple of a device as the iPhone is, thats just as complicated as it is too. This is his big stage, his one shot (right now) and he used it to introduce the two biggest products of the first half of 2007. iWork and iLife will come, they dont neccesarily need a HUGE presentation about these, the iPhone does, new AirPort Extreme.. doesn't. Get my drift? There are still going to be Macs, still going to be iPods, still going to be peripherials, and now there are going to be iPhones.

This may have been one of the most important Keynotes in Apple (computer), inc. history.

sesante2000
Jan 9, 2007, 10:18 PM
Even though this was a great macworld, i can't help but think of what they didn't show...... Like OS X for one and what the hell happened to "one more thing"?????

Object-X
Jan 9, 2007, 10:20 PM
It's interesting that the iPhone will ship right around the time of the Developers Conference. Leopard will have shipped. I hope they provide a developers kit. It's easy to imagine how much of an eco system could develop around the iPhone as a platform. I think it will happen...eventually.

I would like to see a terminial app "iHack". ;)

What I find really interesting is this whole "it's running OS X" thing. With more hard disk space is it not conceievable that they could add a dock for keyboard mouse and monitor? Have a whole computer running on it. A hand held mini if you will.

How about car integration? You know, the usually suspects. Everything done with the iPod will be done with the iPhone, and more.

I imagined such a device, but honestly didn't think they would make it. It's nice to be wrong sometimes.

longofest
Jan 9, 2007, 10:20 PM
By the way, we were told we would hear about Leopard's "secret" features. What's the deal?

I think everyone expected that, and everyone got disappointed. Not 1 rumor site got that expectation correct. It wasn't based on inside info, but rather just on reasonable expectations. Its part of what made the keynote a bit of a downer for some folks that Steve didn't cover what people were expecting to cover, even regardless of what the rumor sites said (after all, even if we hadn't said anything, wouldn't you have expected some word about Leopard?)

iVoid
Jan 9, 2007, 10:20 PM
The only thing about the iTV that leaves me cold is that I don't have any video content that I'd want to stream. I play DVDs or watch TV.

Although they have legal issues regarding ripping DVDs to add to iTunes, I see no reason they couldn't have a Mac or PC stream a DVD to the AppleTV for playback.

Easier to do on a Mac, of course, since they could just modify their DVD player to do it.

ziggyonice
Jan 9, 2007, 10:21 PM
i want 802.11n on my 1st gen macbook pro.... :(

WestonHarvey1
Jan 9, 2007, 10:23 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Apple TV USB Connector
When initially previewed, many wondered why the "iTV" (now Apple TV) contained a USB port. According to the Apple TV website (http://www.apple.com/appletv/specs.html), the USB port is for "service and diagnostics" use.


That reminds me of when the original Macintosh was under development, Steve Jobs was dead set against having any kind of expansion ports on the Mac beyond the standard serial ports and such. Thinking this would imperil the Mac, Burrell Smith snuck an expansion port onto the motherboard, but hid this from Steve by calling it a "Diagnostic Port".

dllavaneras
Jan 9, 2007, 10:26 PM
The Beatles would make a fantastic addition! Go Steve!

At a special event, introducing the new video iPod as well? If that isn't an media hogging event, I don't know what is ;)

thegoldenmackid
Jan 9, 2007, 10:27 PM
ever think that one of the reasons why the "apple iPhone" won't be released for so long...maybe b/c it will have the new leopard os and some of its feature...

Fuchal
Jan 9, 2007, 10:29 PM
That reminds me of when the original Macintosh was under development, Steve Jobs was dead set against having any kind of expansion ports on the Mac beyond the standard serial ports and such. Thinking this would imperil the Mac, Burrell Smith snuck an expansion port onto the motherboard, but hid this from Steve by calling it a "Diagnostic Port".

Forbid them from doing anything useful with the Apple TV USB port like, say, connecting an iPod to browse iPod library on it? *sigh*

areyouwishing
Jan 9, 2007, 10:30 PM
iLife? No way. You use iLife to make content, not access it.

Cause you totally take pictures with iPhoto.

mi5moav
Jan 9, 2007, 10:39 PM
Macworld is not over, more announcements will be made. Plus over the next few weeks are some big shows for Apple, INC...


Appliance minus another A

brandon6684
Jan 9, 2007, 10:39 PM
I'm a bit dissapointed that the keynote seemed to have been mostly about the iPhone with a bit of Apple TV, and nothing on the Mac. I am a bit underwhelmed since I was hoping to see some stuff on Leopard. Although we can probably expect to see this at MacWorld(renamed AppleWorld soon?) from now on since Apple is now officially a consumer electronics company(even they the have been practically since the iPod came out). This doesn't mean the Mac is dead, it's just a part of a larger focus, and I'm guessing Mac stuff will start to become centered around WWDC.

Mgkwho
Jan 9, 2007, 10:39 PM
Anyone notice the new keynote features?

I saw a new reflection on the intel chip at the beginning, new sliding images with the movie announcements for paramount, new text effects with the breakthrough words, and at the end the recap with the key technologies flying by.

Now, aside from the reflection (which could be done with a made up image), and the breaking text for 'breakthrough', the moving images and text can be done in Keynote with a fair bit of action commands.

It just makes sense to me that they included some easy way to do those and many more, most likely taking advantage of core animation in Leopard.

-=|Mgkwho

ipearx
Jan 9, 2007, 10:41 PM
"Can developers make software for the iPhone" really is a huge deal, and could dramatically improve how desirable the phone is to people! Would you buy a computer if you could ONLY run the built in apps?

12 other big questions needing answers about the iPhone:
http://bla.st/site/blog/40/

Catfish_Man
Jan 9, 2007, 10:44 PM
Anyone notice the new keynote features?

I saw a new reflection on the intel chip at the beginning, new sliding images with the movie announcements for paramount, new text effects with the breakthrough words, and at the end the recap with the key technologies flying by.

Now, aside from the reflection (which could be done with a made up image), and the breaking text for 'breakthrough', the moving images and text can be done in Keynote with a fair bit of action commands.

It just makes sense to me that they included some easy way to do those and many more, most likely taking advantage of core animation in Leopard.

-=|Mgkwho

Possibly, but text like that has been trivially easy in Apple Motion for a while now.

Kobaiyashi
Jan 9, 2007, 10:46 PM
Any one know if macworld attendees are able to play around with the iphone or are they just in displays for one to look at/drool over? Debating whether I want to make the trek down to the conference or not.

Thanks!

Stridder44
Jan 9, 2007, 10:48 PM
Macworld is not over, more announcements will be made. Plus over the next few weeks are some big shows for Apple, INC...


Appliance minus another A


"Apple releases Dishwasher and Vacuum Pro"

I want Apple to release a clothing line (which would be inspired from the iPod ads).

brandon6684
Jan 9, 2007, 10:51 PM
"Can developers make software for the iPhone" really is a huge deal, and could dramatically improve how desirable the phone is to people! Would you buy a computer if you could ONLY run the built in apps?

12 other big questions needing answers about the iPhone:
http://bla.st/site/blog/40/

I'm afraid that Application developement will be locked down to widgets, and not only lack native development, but also J2ME compatibility, but hopefully I'm wrong.

steve jr.
Jan 9, 2007, 10:56 PM
I couldn't create a new thread, so I'll just start it here. In the transcript it is said "11:04 am The Mac Observer: Steve choked up while thanking the families." It is also said in the trans that his family is present. And while giving this thanks, he looks in the same direction. Could this be the direction of his family? And more importantly a sensitive part of Steve? Since he's been through a lot with the backdating, is it possible he's taken a new look on things. The first post here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=267269) talks of him being excited and vocal. BUT, the biggest is the Keynote. If you scroll through to 1:46:55 range where he talking about the family, his body language is very jumpy, and when he finally says thank you, he does choke up and sniffles a bit.

on another note, there was JUST a story on ABC with an exclusive enterview with Steve http://abcnews.go.com/Video/ . For any subscribers out there, anyone willing to grab a copy?

Also, anyone able to grad any shots of the Jobs Family?

Porco
Jan 9, 2007, 11:16 PM
So many people are talking about "this is the day the Mac died." Shut up.

[....]

This may have been one of the most important Keynotes in Apple (computer), inc. history.

I agree... I posted this on another site, in a similar vein:

I don't think any of us Mac fans should be worried about Apple's 'diversifying'. This [iPhone] runs some sort of version of OS X, Safari, iTunes, Mail... it's almost a Mac in all but the name! If anything, this is a move back towards their core business of the Mac, adding more Mac technologies to the iPod.

The Apple TV and iTunes downloads underline the point, albeit slightly less dramatically than the iPhone: there is a central belief that all this stuff in our life (media, communication, creativity, organisation, work and fun) can be brought together and exponentially improved by using the Mac.

Apple is not so much diversifying as integrating - and I think that is exactly what they've been about for years. I see the iPhone as a fortuitously natural progression of everything else they have done, and I think it has the potential to be the best thing they've ever done.

maveness
Jan 9, 2007, 11:26 PM
I find it interesting that no one has commented on the earthmoving change in Apple tactics with this keynote.

Steve Jobs spent 2 hours, essentially, talking about a product that will not be released for 6 months. So much for not talking about products in the pipeline!

It's clear to me that this keynote was, more than anything, aimed at Wall Street. The iPhone rumors had reached such a fever pitch that, had the keynote NOT presented the iPhone, Apple stock would have taken a huge hit. So it was announced and demoed way ahead of schedule. I suspect Leopard-dependent features and other goodies (iChat connection?) were NOT shown because they're simply not ready. I also suspect there WILL be an API (and companies like Skype will find a way to make the iPHone into a VOIP handset).

No new Mac, no iLife software, no other Apple product could possibly have offset the disappointment that the market would have expressed by punishing Apple stock had the iPhone not been introduced.

The AppleTV was also important for the addition of Paramount studios. Expect the trickle of studio participation in iTMS to become a steady flow.

I also expect a steady, perhaps monthly, schedule of Special Events to present new hardware, new software, and especially Leopard. Apple, who already saturated the news cycle today, will continue to be out front with new cool stuff on a regular basis.

kresh
Jan 9, 2007, 11:37 PM
I find it interesting that no one has commented on the earthmoving change in Apple tactics with this keynote.

Steve Jobs spent 2 hours, essentially, talking about a product that will not be released for 6 months. So much for not talking about products in the pipeline!

It's clear to me that this keynote was, more than anything, aimed at Wall Street. The iPhone rumors had reached such a fever pitch that, had the keynote NOT presented the iPhone, Apple stock would have taken a huge hit. So it was announced and demoed way ahead of schedule.

He plainly said that the FCC approval process took months and that he prefered that Apple made the announcement instead of the FCC (Really by others reading the FCC filings).

I don't see this in the same light as Microsoft's behavior to pre-announce things to freeze the market.

york2600
Jan 9, 2007, 11:41 PM
He plainly said that the FCC approval process took months and that he prefered that Apple made the announcement instead of the FCC (Really by others reading the FCC filings).

I don't see this in the same light as Microsoft's behavior to pre-announce things to freeze the market.

I've been wondering how this whole Apple vs. FCC thing was going to work out for a while now. Sites like Engadget.com regularly show off FCC pictures of new phones. Apple really had to announce this whole thing before the FCC got their hands on it. If all we had were images everyone would assume the worst (as they always do) and Apple's stock would take a hit.

twoodcc
Jan 9, 2007, 11:41 PM
Even though this was a great macworld, i can't help but think of what they didn't show...... Like OS X for one and what the hell happened to "one more thing"?????

i agree, but i'm still excited about the iphone though.....

mi5moav
Jan 9, 2007, 11:52 PM
did anyone notice that the John Lennon Bus now has the Apple logo on the front of it!!! They will probably make their announcement in the next few days about the catalog.

http://www.jlsc.com/bus/

Marzzz
Jan 10, 2007, 12:12 AM
What I am wondering is when all that touchscreen technology will make it to laptops.....can you just imagine the MacBook Pro becoming the "MacScreen Pro?"

loftzon
Jan 10, 2007, 12:15 AM
Hi, i gotta tell you and mean this in a good way! The live broadcast from macrumorslive.com was terrible! Just terrible. Whoever maintained it kept writing unfinished sentences so you couldn't make any sence of what was really going on. Like who was Steve thanking in the beginning of the keynote?? the Engadget Live broadcast from this event was much better. A moderator here should check that out and compare,
http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/live-from-macworld-2007-steve-jobs-keynote/

mambodancer
Jan 10, 2007, 12:36 AM
I agree... I posted this on another site, in a similar vein:

I don't think any of us Mac fans should be worried about Apple's 'diversifying'. This [iPhone] runs some sort of version of OS X, Safari, iTunes, Mail... it's almost a Mac in all but the name! If anything, this is a move back towards their core business of the Mac, adding more Mac technologies to the iPod.

The Apple TV and iTunes downloads underline the point, albeit slightly less dramatically than the iPhone: there is a central belief that all this stuff in our life (media, communication, creativity, organisation, work and fun) can be brought together and exponentially improved by using the Mac.

Apple is not so much diversifying as integrating - and I think that is exactly what they've been about for years. I see the iPhone as a fortuitously natural progression of everything else they have done, and I think it has the potential to be the best thing they've ever done.

I haven't seen it posted here yet but if you read between the lines of the iPhone demo you just saw 2 new Leopard technologies demonstrated. (Remember, the iPhone has OSX built in it).

The first-resolution independence

The second-gestural UI

The addition of gestural UI probably means that the 6G iPods (the ones without phone capabilities) will have that built in. In fact, it'll probably look exactly like the iPhone.

This also may imply that the next generation displays may incorporate this touch technology and if that's the case, you can bet that touch screen MacBooks are not too far behind.

Finally, AppleTV implies a new version of iTunes. What I didn't see and I don't think it can do this, I don't think you can play a DVD from your computer to your AppleTV.

gugy
Jan 10, 2007, 12:38 AM
It's clear to me that this keynote was, more than anything, aimed at Wall Street. The iPhone rumors had reached such a fever pitch that, had the keynote NOT presented the iPhone, Apple stock would have taken a huge hit. So it was announced and demoed way ahead of schedule.

very true!

I am pretty sure in the upcoming months until end of spring we will see:
widescreen ipod
Mac pro octo-core
iLife and iWork at the same time of Leopard.
new displays and isight

The new iPhone is just incredible. Just hate the fact Cingular is the carrier. I hate them.

Apple TV is great the biggest disapointment is the lack of HDTV support.

great times for Apple!

CJD2112
Jan 10, 2007, 12:44 AM
You all should check this out on multi-touch screens:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=89sz8ExZndc

I remember seeing this demonstration on Youtube a loooong time ago. When Jobs announced its use, my first thought was "Wow, Apple was quick in securing that technology". This was developed many years ago in Japan, so I am assuming Apple quietly "secured" this technology, quite possibly making someone very wealthy.

CJD2112
Jan 10, 2007, 12:55 AM
very true!


The new iPhone is just incredible. Just hate the fact Cingular is the carrier. I hate them.



Hmmmm, don't know why everyone is hating on Cingular. I used Verizon for years and just recently switched. Verizon and Sprint are on ancient CDMA technology, which can not be used internationally as GSM. With GSM+EDGE and Cingular's recent anouncement of adding HSDPA to the network, faster download rates (as fast as 10+ MPS) are on the way for HTML rich browsing, IMAP and POP3 Emailing, etc. Would Jobs pick a company whose service is "mediocre" to launch what Jobs claims to be the next revolutionary product? Most of the world uses GSM technology, millions in fact, rather than U.S. companies such as Verizon and Sprint [CDMA]. Personally, after Verizon screwed up dozens of my bills [as well as countless friends'] coupled with their horrid customer service [which has been on record] as well as their "business tactics" in crippling bluetooth OBEX in order to charge customers more money to download ringtones, pictures and contacts [remember, Verizon was sued by customers for falsely advertising the Motorola v710 as a fully operational phone when Verizon knowingly crippled the bluetooth file exchange functionality - article link http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1751567,00.asp ], I would rather use a company that treats its customers with respect. CIngular doesn't cripple their phones. Having left Verizon after 8+ years and moving to Cingular, I can download pictures and videos I have taken with my RAZR wirelessly with bluetooth, sync my contacts, iCal, mail, etc. all seemlessly on my Mac Pro. My calls are crisp and clear, never dropped and my signal range is much greater than Verizons. It's a breath of fresh air. In short, I highly recommend the "haters" stop being so sensitive about their "service" and realize that Cingular is a great company. Would Steve Jobs stake his reputation and the "next revolutionary device" on "horrid service"? I think not.

mi5moav
Jan 10, 2007, 12:58 AM
Actually, multi touch capable sensing on screens i believe was patent by a company called fingerworks or something about 5 or 6 years ago. And if I recall it was done by a grad student at the univerity of Mass or Deleware.

People have mentioned that Apple quickly snapped up the patents and have added their own as well as some from their newton patents. Some have also speculated that Apple is contemplating a buyout of Palm since they own Handspring patents, Palm patents as well as some other Patents By Be, Inc. regarding touchscreens, handwriting recognition and some other odds and ends. Securing as many touch screen patents could really jeopardize the market for the future of smart phones and other tablet devices.

CJD2112
Jan 10, 2007, 01:15 AM
Actually, multi touch capable sensing on screens i believe was patent by a company called fingerworks or something about 5 or 6 years ago. And if I recall it was done by a grad student at the univerity of Mass or Deleware.


Hmmmmm :confused: gonna have to research that. I have been reading up on multiscreen use for almost two years now, and the farthest back any records I could find go is to 2004. If in fact it did come out as long ago as you say, then why did Jobs and his team only just implement multi-screen technology last year [which is indicated from the US patents that were filed]?


Securing as many touch screen patents could really jeopardize the market for the future of smart phones and other tablet devices.

My thoughts exactly. I'd hate to see any company (Apple, Inc. or M$ or Palm) buy out any one technology. I'd hate to think any one would secure this technology and monopolize it, as competition and free market use would [in theory] produce improvements and cheaper alternatives.

However, any one else thinking Multi-touch Apple Cinema Display's might be pretty cool? Perhaps not completely practical, but cool none the less...

cicottrell
Jan 10, 2007, 01:29 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)


Apple TV USB Connector
When initially previewed, many wondered why the "iTV" (now Apple TV) contained a USB port. According to the Apple TV website (http://www.apple.com/appletv/specs.html), the USB port is for "service and diagnostics" use.



Here in the UK, I use EyeTV (http://www.elgato.com/) to view Freeview Digital TV on my Mac, and can pause, rewind and record using my Mac's hard disk. The freeview converter is a very small USB stick. Do you think someone will make a USB Digital Telly stick to plug into the USB port on AppleTV, and allowing us to record directly onto the AppleTV's hard disk? From there we could stream recorded Telly back to the mac to store, burn to DVD or put on a iPod. The stick could also allow cable or satelite telly to go though the AppleTV.I read somewhere that the main reason for not including TV in frontrow is that digital telly uses different connectors in different parts of the world, but if we all had a USB telly stick adaptor, that would solve that problem.

I can see why there is not DVD player, as most people have a DVD player under their TV anyway, and unless the law changes allowing us to rip DVD's, Apple won't go down this route.

dswoodley
Jan 10, 2007, 01:30 AM
Anyone who is dissappointed shouldn't be if they know the history of Apple. Apple uses MacWorld for showing off innovation - period. iLife, iWork, all that jazz will come, but honestly if those were things jobs promoted at the expense of iPhone and Apple TV, everyone would have screamed bloodly murder. Apple keeps its image fresh by not being formulaic.

JZ Wire
Jan 10, 2007, 02:25 AM
Even though this was a great macworld, i can't help but think of what they didn't show...... Like OS X for one and what the hell happened to "one more thing"?????

Thats what I kinda thought at first but remember that Steve said this is going to be a great year and that they have stuff in the pipeline for the months to come. So expect lots of great things from Apple before the year is up! :)

drlunanerd
Jan 10, 2007, 04:40 AM
Is the iPhone display really that high resolution? It's only 320x480, 153600 pixels at 3.5 inches. Current DSLR cameras are running at 230000 pixels at 2.5 inches.

JonDann
Jan 10, 2007, 04:53 AM
I haven't seen it posted here yet but if you read between the lines of the iPhone demo you just saw 2 new Leopard technologies demonstrated. (Remember, the iPhone has OSX built in it).

The first-resolution independence

The second-gestural UI

The addition of gestural UI probably means that the 6G iPods (the ones without phone capabilities) will have that built in. In fact, it'll probably look exactly like the iPhone.

This also may imply that the next generation displays may incorporate this touch technology and if that's the case, you can bet that touch screen MacBooks are not too far behind.

Finally, AppleTV implies a new version of iTunes. What I didn't see and I don't think it can do this, I don't think you can play a DVD from your computer to your AppleTV.

I have a third to add to this Core Animation. There's no way they were going to release a phone with a technology that you can get on the desktop yet. When he said that I thought Leopard was our 'one more thing...'

We saw alot of new things today, in the keynote transitions aswell, that's iWork '07. Also, a new iTunes to accommodate AppleTV and iPhone.

My bet is that iLife'07 and iWork '07 both have some Leopard-only features, they'll still run on Tiger and G4/G5 systems, but to see their full UI beauty they'll need CoreAnim

JonDann
Jan 10, 2007, 05:28 AM
Does anyone think that the multi-touch UI could spell a new wave of iMacs and displays, one that use multi-touch aswell as all the standard input devices?

If it works on such a small device, there must be larger iterations.

goosnarrggh
Jan 10, 2007, 05:57 AM
Hum.

We have no evidence of exactly what Apple means when it says the iPhone "runs OS X".

The way I see it, it could mean at least three things:
1) They actually threw an embedded PPC or x86 chip into the phone and have installed a stripped-down version of the MacOS (kernel, API, core technologies) onto the thing.

In that case, if Apple chose to, they could open it up to any existing Universal application, with caveats such as limitations in the display size (resolution independence can only buy you so much since you're still stuck with 320*480 pixels), UI (how many existing applications would lend themselves to the touchscreen interface) and library dependencies due to features that may have been stripped out to limit the firmware size.

2) They ported the underlying MacOS ecosystem (kernel, API, code technologies) over to a new embedded architecture (likely ARM). Maybe they also expanded Rosetta to allow PPC or Intel programs to run on this new chip; maybe not.

If that is the case, then the development paradigm to get new OSX applications to run on it natively would likely be akin to what developers had to go through to transition from PPC to Intel. We'd end up with 5 architectures in a full-up Universal binary: PPC32, PPC64, x86, x86_64, ARM.

3) They re-implemented core OSX user experiences to a different underlying ecosystem (kernel, API).

If that is the case, then the iPhone's operating system would really just be "OSX" in brand-name only. It would be very similar to what Microsoft has with the Win32/WinCE branding dichotomy: The two are not truly interchangeable. Of course, MS has simplified the situation by making versions of the .NET framework and CLR that run on both architectures, so it is possible to create limited platform-independent applications which, after JIT recompilation, run at nearly-native speeds, on both operating systems.

For the record, the fact that there are applets called "Safari" and "Mail" which bear a visual and functional similarity to their namesakes in the "normal" Mac OS is not sufficient evidence to support any of the three possibilities I listed above. There is nothing stopping them from doing what MS did with the PocketPC platform and "Internet Explorer Mobile", "Windows Media Mobile", etc: Creating visually similar versions of the desktop equivalent software, but with a different underlying OS driving the programs.

Maybe soon we'll get an answer; I think any conjecture we come up with right now is premature.

PharmD
Jan 10, 2007, 06:41 AM
I sure hope they release a SDK. I need some sort of device to put my drug info databases on and I sure don't want it to be a Palm anymore.

Sol
Jan 10, 2007, 07:12 AM
Does anyone think that the multi-touch UI could spell a new wave of iMacs and displays, one that use multi-touch aswell as all the standard input devices?

Yes, that is exactly what I think but it will take a while; who knows what multi-touch functionality will add to the cost of a display? Functionality would be improved in many ways; windows could be moved around, text highlighted, brush-strokes simulated and applications launched with the use of our fingers. The problem would be designing a User Interface for both the touch-screen and mouse & keyboard inputs.

On another note, did anyone notice the subtle reference to the Motorola ROKR's keynote demonstration? I recall Steve Jobs taking a call and then fumbling the resumption of music by pressing the wrong button. Today he took a call and after hanging up the iPhone automatically resumed playing music. Something tells me he fumbled during the ROKR demonstration on purpose to impress us with the Apple phone years later.

MacVault
Jan 10, 2007, 07:13 AM
I'm just wondering why Apple & Google shared the stage with Yahoo? I don't really have anything against poor little Yahoo, and I use their webmail all the time, but the Yahoo founder had the nerve to get up there in front of Eric Schmit and talk about their new search features, etc. What's up with that?

barakthecat
Jan 10, 2007, 07:16 AM
I sure hope they release a SDK. I need some sort of device to put my drug info databases on and I sure don't want it to be a Palm anymore.

I'm with you. Get Epocrates and other healthcare apps running on this thing and my Treo 700p will be on Craig's List pretty quickly (and I love my Treo 700p which is much easier to use than Steve would want us to believe).

On another note, did anyone track down the Starbuck's Steve called and get his cell phone number?

dvkid
Jan 10, 2007, 08:20 AM
The resolution independence mentioned at WWDC would also prove useful if a new series of higher resolution monitors became available. Odd that the iSight went away a few weeks ago and no replacement has been named yet.

bmtech
Jan 10, 2007, 08:41 AM
Did anyone notice that they showed a Beatles CD cover (Abbey Road) when he was displaying the phone toward the end of presentation (just b4 Cingular took the stage). It was a static shot so it was approved.

zerger
Jan 10, 2007, 08:51 AM
Interesting. I was wondering how the move from Apple Computer --> Apple Ltd would effect the ongoing row (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer) between Apple the gadget company and Apple the music company. I wonder if this overture to the Beatles (Apple music's largest name) fits into the equation somehow?

revchrisesq
Jan 10, 2007, 09:51 AM
My observations:

1. I found it strange that the Apple TV, the new Airport Extreme and the Mini Mac all have differing dimensions. I think Apple would have been up on their design to use the same dimensions for stacking and aesthetic purposes.

2. I was very disappointed that there was no mention of iWork 07, iLife 07, Leopard, a 12 Macbook Pro, 8 core MacPro, or for that matter ANYTHING about computers.

3. I understand the name change, but isn't that an unnecessary financial or corporate risk to possible reopen the Apple Records/Beatles lawsuit, by changing their name to simply APPLE? Did it really MATTER?

4. Likewise, why iPhone when Cisco owns that trademark? (Unless the deal and settlement to rights of this name are already inked.)

5. I don't understand why Apple would commit itself to a multiyear exclusivity with Cingular and EDGE technology. Why not EVDO and Verizon, and what about the many other carriers? Most of us have friends connected with our carriers and we're not necessarily changing carriers just to get a cool phone. And why not just a full screen ipod without the phone? Why not more ram? Why so expensive?

6. I can already play movies from my MacBook to my Plasma using a mini HDI to HDMI cable. Do I really want to pay $300 for a 40 gig hard drive to do this right now? Is the USB port on the Apple TV for a possible additional external massive hard drive connection?

7. As I'm not about to change from Verizon which has the best coverage in my area of the country, I saw nothing I "had to have" this MacWorld.

gadget1974
Jan 10, 2007, 10:18 AM
Is the iPhone display really that high resolution? It's only 320x480, 153600 pixels at 3.5 inches.

Yes, not actually that good. I'm a huge Mac fan, but:

Average Laptop - 100 pixels per inch
The Nokia 770 / N800 – 224ppi
The iPhone – 160ppi

The Nokia is a fantastic product, it can display most webpages with no zooming... pity Apple couldn't get that screen into the device..

tonyvz
Jan 10, 2007, 11:03 AM
Cause you totally take pictures with iPhoto.


the iPhone already has an "iPhoto" app.

it looks pretty cool too...

Toe
Jan 10, 2007, 11:21 AM
"OS X" is not "Mac OS X."

Apple wouldn't use two different phrases if they weren't two different things.

See: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=268363

jmsait19
Jan 10, 2007, 11:49 AM
to all you people who say "why not my carrier..." i would just like to say that if your carrier got it then everyone else would say the same thing...

lets not argue about this anymore. they had to pick someone, it happened to be cingular. its unfortunate for everyone not cingular.

the world will keep spinning.

whatever
Jan 10, 2007, 12:12 PM
The Beatles would make a fantastic addition! Go Steve!

The only thing about the iTV that leaves me cold is that I don't have any video content that I'd want to stream. I play DVDs or watch TV. Maybe showing your photos on a larger display, but it does seem like an expensive Video Airport Express...
Think out of the box for a second. Say you have alot of DVD's and you've decided that they're just taking up room in your "TV" room, wouldn't it be nice to load them all on your computer (you know use MactheRipper on them, these are your DVDs, copy them onto a large hard disk and the create an alias to you Movies folder) and instantly you have a poor man's version of Kaleidescape (http://www.kaleidescape.com/) for only $299 (the last I check Kaleidescape costs around $10,000) and the price of a hard drive.
Now let's say you have two units on in the living room and one in the kids room. No more looking or flipping through DVDs. This is pretty awesome. Will this work. It should. It works for me today with Frontrow (and although it's nice to watch movies on my 30" ACD, it would be nicer to watch it from a couch (and hopefully my new Pioneer 50" 1080P Plasma)).

whatever
Jan 10, 2007, 12:19 PM
I'm afraid that Application developement will be locked down to widgets, and not only lack native development, but also J2ME compatibility, but hopefully I'm wrong.
No, it won't be locked down device. Even if it was, it will be easy to hack. Just look at the PSP for a moment, which Sony thought was a locked down device.
Job's all but said that he does not want to update the iPhone everytime someone comes up with a new idea or use for it, so expect it to be open to developers. However, it will need OS X 10.5's developers kit.

whatever
Jan 10, 2007, 12:25 PM
I'm just wondering why Apple & Google shared the stage with Yahoo? I don't really have anything against poor little Yahoo, and I use their webmail all the time, but the Yahoo founder had the nerve to get up there in front of Eric Schmit and talk about their new search features, etc. What's up with that?

My brother and I were talking about Yahoo just last night. They are often overshadowed by Google, but 250 million e-mail accounts! Wow, that's pretty impressive!

danielwsmithee
Jan 10, 2007, 12:35 PM
Hi, i gotta tell you and mean this in a good way! The live broadcast from macrumorslive.com was terrible! Just terrible. Whoever maintained it kept writing unfinished sentences so you couldn't make any sence of what was really going on. Like who was Steve thanking in the beginning of the keynote?? the Engadget Live broadcast from this event was much better. A moderator here should check that out and compare,
http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/live-from-macworld-2007-steve-jobs-keynote/
I agree engadget was better now if we could just integrate the live feed that macrumors had with the content that engadget had that would be ideal.

danielwsmithee
Jan 10, 2007, 12:38 PM
Apple TV is great the biggest disapointment is the lack of HDTV support. Huh? Do you mean 1080p. Because it does support HD in 1080i or 720p.

danielwsmithee
Jan 10, 2007, 12:48 PM
Think out of the box for a second. Say you have alot of DVD's and you've decided that they're just taking up room in your "TV" room, wouldn't it be nice to load them all on your computer (you know use MactheRipper on them, these are your DVDs, copy them onto a large hard disk and the create an alias to you Movies folder) and instantly you have a poor man's version of Kaleidescape (http://www.kaleidescape.com/) for only $299 (the last I check Kaleidescape costs around $10,000) and the price of a hard drive.
This will work just fine with Handbrake. Rip your DVD with handbrake place in iTunes, and it will show up on your iTV.

Rocketman
Jan 10, 2007, 12:54 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Apple TV USB Connector
When initially previewed, many wondered why the "iTV" (now Apple TV) contained a USB port. According to the Apple TV website (http://www.apple.com/appletv/specs.html), the USB port is for "service and diagnostics" use.


From http://www.apple.com/airportextreme/

"Instant drive sharing.
New to AirPort Extreme, AirPort Disk turns almost any external USB hard drive into a shared drive. Simply connect the drive to the USB port on the back of your AirPort Extreme and — voila — all the documents, videos, photos, and other files on the drive instantly become available to anyone on the secure network, Mac and PC alike. It’s perfect for backups, collaborative projects, and more."

Rocketman

Rocketman
Jan 10, 2007, 01:07 PM
Furthermore it seems once you have iTV and an ethernet hub, you do not need an airport extreme as a separate device. The only incentive for AE over iTV is the price diffrential, but if you put an iTV in 2 or more places to service multiple TV's, one can place the non 802.11n supported computers within ethernet wireline distance of the device to bring older computers into the new world.

Rocketman

peharri
Jan 10, 2007, 02:44 PM
Anyone who is dissappointed shouldn't be if they know the history of Apple. Apple uses MacWorld for showing off innovation - period. iLife, iWork, all that jazz will come, but honestly if those were things jobs promoted at the expense of iPhone and Apple TV, everyone would have screamed bloodly murder. Apple keeps its image fresh by not being formulaic.

So Leopard's not going to innovative this year? Ahhhhhhhh.

No, seriously, what bothers me most of all is that there are no more keynotes until WWDC that would be suitable venues for demoing Leopard. That means no Leopard until... well, WWDC was in August last year.

Hmm, key flagship operating system, unexplained delays, what are they doing, copying Microsoft?

peharri
Jan 10, 2007, 02:47 PM
lets not argue about this anymore. they had to pick someone,

No they didn't.

It's a freakin' GSM phone, compatible with a whole host of operators. They could have sold it to Cingular, T-Mobile, SunCom, and a whole host of others. Instead, they choose to give it EXCLUSIVELY to Cingular and nobody else.

I wouldn't object if they said "$600 locked to Cingular, $850 unlocked for anyone GSM", but that's not what they're doing.

whatever
Jan 10, 2007, 03:06 PM
No they didn't.

It's a freakin' GSM phone, compatible with a whole host of operators. They could have sold it to Cingular, T-Mobile, SunCom, and a whole host of others. Instead, they choose to give it EXCLUSIVELY to Cingular and nobody else.

I wouldn't object if they said "$600 locked to Cingular, $850 unlocked for anyone GSM", but that's not what they're doing.
Did you not watch the keynote? There is a reason Apple picked Cingular. They needed to actually partner with someone who was willing to "partner" and just not be a reseller of a dumbed down phone. The new implentation of voicemail alone. Could you picture Verizon, a company known for crippling working features in their mobile devices, actually work with Apple to get this to done? I wouldn't be surprised that Apple had meetings with everyone and they just laughed at Apple and said "No one is going to spend $500.00 on a phone". It's almost like the iPod and FairPlay all over again.

phillipjfry
Jan 10, 2007, 03:06 PM
No they didn't.

It's a freakin' GSM phone, compatible with a whole host of operators. They could have sold it to Cingular, T-Mobile, SunCom, and a whole host of others. Instead, they choose to give it EXCLUSIVELY to Cingular and nobody else.

I wouldn't object if they said "$600 locked to Cingular, $850 unlocked for anyone GSM", but that's not what they're doing.


Then Jobs wouldn't have had much use for the Cingular Suit then would he?
If Apple would have allowed the phone to be unlocked to any GSM carrier it would have been Cingulars Chief Exec up on stage reading cue cards trying to grab potential Cingular customers....
When I first tried to get my razr, only cingular had it, but I'm a verizon kinda guy (i go with what works). But after a while more and more carriers started supporting the razr. It might take a while (2009?), but who knows.

peharri
Jan 10, 2007, 04:04 PM
Did you not watch the keynote? There is a reason Apple picked Cingular. They needed to actually partner with someone who was willing to "partner" and just not be a reseller of a dumbed down phone. The new implentation of voicemail alone. Could you picture Verizon, a company known for crippling working features in their mobile devices, actually work with Apple to get this to done? I wouldn't be surprised that Apple had meetings with everyone and they just laughed at Apple and said "No one is going to spend $500.00 on a phone". It's almost like the iPod and FairPlay all over again.

Woah, woah! Hold on there! You're going too fast!

So, let me get this straight. Apple needed to partner with someone, otherwise they'd have been forced to partner with Verizon. Who would have Verizoned the phone.

No, sorry, that's complete rubbish. They didn't need to partner with anyone. So far as I can see, they've asked Cingular to enhance their voicemail, but otherwise there is nothing Cingular specific in the phone.

They could have released it for all GSM carriers. They chose not to. That's not good. They did not "have" to partner with Cingular, and they certainly didn't have to make it a Cingular exclusive. And the phone, with enhanced voicemail, is not better locked to a carrier than unlocked, with regular voicemail, and available to all.

whatever
Jan 10, 2007, 04:17 PM
Woah, woah! Hold on there! You're going too fast!

So, let me get this straight. Apple needed to partner with someone, otherwise they'd have been forced to partner with Verizon. Who would have Verizoned the phone.

No, sorry, that's complete rubbish. They didn't need to partner with anyone. So far as I can see, they've asked Cingular to enhance their voicemail, but otherwise there is nothing Cingular specific in the phone.

They could have released it for all GSM carriers. They chose not to. That's not good. They did not "have" to partner with Cingular, and they certainly didn't have to make it a Cingular exclusive. And the phone, with enhanced voicemail, is not better locked to a carrier than unlocked, with regular voicemail, and available to all.
No, what I'm saying is that Apple had to partner with the various providers. I'm sure Apple had some terms they wanted met and after two years of negotiations the only US providers that agreed to Apples terms was Cingular/AT&T.
And yes they did need to partner with someone, because they didn't want to release a typical phone.
When I have the choice (which will be in six months) to choose between a locked iPhone or an unlocked non iPhone, I'm picking the iPhone. Not because it's an Apple product, but because it has the features I want.
Hopefully the providers in Europe will learn from this and cooperate with Apple.

Kabeyun
Jan 10, 2007, 05:28 PM
4. Likewise, why iPhone when Cisco owns that trademark? (Unless the deal and settlement to rights of this name are already inked.)
Guess not:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070110/ap_on_hi_te/cisco_apple

-K

Mac'Mo
Jan 10, 2007, 10:19 PM
i absolutely LOVE the new ipod ads

BillyShears
Jan 11, 2007, 01:26 AM
I was just thinking about John Mayer's performance. Did it seem odd to any of you that he performed? I know Jobs said it's a tradition or whatever, but it seems maybe they had some music-related announcement that was never made. (I guess iPhone and AppleTV are "music-related" but I think their other features overshadow the capability to play music.)

Maybe an iLife demo was planned but something went wrong?

guzhogi
Jan 11, 2007, 10:13 AM
One thing I'd like to see the Apple TV have is full DVR functionality so it can record live TV. I'm sure many people would like that.

I'm a little sad that only the Apple TV & iPhone were announced. What about iLife/iWork '07? I'm sure that some of their computers are up for an update soon, too. Nothing against the iTV & iPhone, it's just that Apple has other products, too. I wouldn't mind having a 3 hour keynote if it meant more stuff was announced. First hour could be updates to current software (iLife, iWork), 2nd hour being updates to existing hardware and the third hour being the "One more thing…" new products hour. Or something like that. Or maybe 30 minutes update on sales, market share, having sold the n millionth song and stuff. 45 Minutes on updated software, another 45 min. for updated hardware and an hour for new stuff. At least this wasn't like the press event they had when they announced the iPod Hi-Fi speaker. I was like "Uh… yeah, okay. Whatever." To me, the hi-fi isn't such an important product to have so much hoopla over it. Just my 2 cents.

peharri
Jan 11, 2007, 10:19 AM
And yes they did need to partner with someone, because they didn't want to release a typical phone.

The point was already addressed and you appear to be deliberately ignoring it, unless you're saying that the ONLY think that makes the iPhone atypical is the voicemail...

Again, given the choice between an Apple phone available for any GSM carrier, and an Apple phone that only works on one carrier but has "picture voicemail", the former is unquestionably superior. Infinitely superior.

It is absolutely 100% false to argue that Apple was forced to partner with someone in order to produce an atypical phone. 100% false. It is bizarre anyone would continue to argue that.

MikeTheC
Jan 11, 2007, 01:20 PM
The iPhone is not for me.

I was talking to a friend of mine last night about this, and here is why the iPhone is not the telephony product for me. You can put this down to being unreasonable or whatever you like; however that only proves the point that this is *not* the phone I'm looking for.

1. $599 or $699 -- I don't care how innovative the product is, I simply don't have a $6-700 need for a TELEPHONE.

2. Max storage of 8GB -- Considering the purchase price, I'm getting practically nothing for storage space. This is -- and let's be honest here -- a Video iPod on steroids. It's got a waaaaaay huge screen, it's designed to handle movies in a really big way; and then they hamstring it by not giving you more storage?

3. No 3G -- I mean, come on. Clearly for a device of this price range, such technology is a no-brainer.

4. Locked Phone -- For a phone of this price, I don't want to ever have to worry about not being able to switch carriers. And I refuse to give any cell carrier a $600+ leash to my neck. Uh uh, not going to happen.

5. No tactile sense for the keypad -- This is actually a major point that my friend raised. He works for a major ISP and has a company-issued "smartphone" which he uses to keep in close contact at all times. One of the tasks he performs is text messaging and emailing on it, and his point is that with a real keypad you can develop a kinesthetic -- or tactile -- sense, and this aids in allowing you to multitask as well as not having to stare at the keyboard. Yes, obviously this point runs in diametric opposition to the central design theme of the phone. Now, I don't own a "smartphone" (I actually own a RAZR), and I don't text message at all, but I can appreciate (and fully agree with) this particular point.

6. Battery Run-Time -- So, we're talking 16 hours of using the phone as an iPod; 5 hours of using it as a phone; and less than 5 as a Video iPod. That means for me I'd need to keep the d*** thing plugged in all the time. NO -- absolutely not!!! The battery runtime is (for me) 1/2 to 1/3 of what is acceptable. Period.

And I have to tell you folks, each and every one of these points (that is, not collectively, but each one by itself) is a deal-breaker for me.

To me, since the focus of Steve's keynote was the iPhone, yes, the keynote was a total disappointment for me.

Now, regarding the iTV (er, I mean the "Apple TV")...

Tell me if it's possible for Apple to ******* up a product name any worse? I mean, even Steve all but said that they should have left the name alone.

The price of the thing is within the bounds of acceptability for me. However, where the h*** is it's TIVO capabilities? Why is the darn thing so clearly neutered?

Also, on a strictly personal level, it's useless to me. It has no inputs on it that I can make use of with the entertainment equipment I have. Yes, I understand it's being geared to the "forward-looking" modern era of consumer multimedia electronics; nevertheless not all of us have swallowed the "let's switch to hi-def and HDMI" pill.

On a purely personal level (and you can probably figure this much out about me by looking at my sig), I don't watch very much of anything. I subscribe to minimum basic cable (for which I pay about $13 a month), and cable modem service. I wouldn't even bother to subscribe to minimum basic cable but for the other person who lives here who wants to watch network television without having to put rabbit ears on the roof and deal with analog broadcast "snow". And, frankly, neither of us has enough interest to justify spending money on another TV to replace the perfectly-working one we already own (RCA Proscan, vintage 1994).

And yes, I'm fully aware that one day in the future, when I'm so bored and so lacking in anything else to do that I actually turn the TV on to watch something, all that will be there is snow because they will have previously stopped broadcasting lo-def analog cable. And you know what my reaction and response will be? I'll be on the phone to the cable provider to go ahead and cancel my cable TV service and just have a cable modem.

Yes, I dislike the entertainment industry that much.

</rant>

Toe
Jan 11, 2007, 03:35 PM
1. $599 or $699 -- I don't care how innovative the product is, I simply don't have a $6-700 need for a TELEPHONE.

That's not the point at all. These days, everyone has a telephone in their pocket. What this does is give you an incredible multifunction device without adding any additional bulk to your pocket. In other words, the phone is an added bonus, not the core function. A Mac can run VOIP software and act as a phone too, but nobody complains about their Mac being a $1000 phone (though, if you think about it, for most people, their computer is really just a $1000 e-mail and web-browsing device).

Also, the phone that you do get with the iPhone is not just a phone. It is fully integrated into the other apps. How many other phones let you search the businesses around your present location and call one of them with a very minimum of effort? Conference call with two touches? E-mail to the person you're talking to? Let you switch off speakerphone without any effort? And so on...

failsafe1
Jan 11, 2007, 03:46 PM
The iPhone is not for me.

1. $599 or $699 -- I don't care how innovative the product is, I simply don't have a $6-700 need for a TELEPHONE.

3. No 3G -- I mean, come on. Clearly for a device of this price range, such technology is a no-brainer.

4. Locked Phone -- For a phone of this price, I don't want to ever have to worry about not being able to switch carriers. And I refuse to give any cell carrier a $600+ leash to my neck. Uh uh, not going to happen.

</rant>

1. I am in the market for a nice new phone and video capable iPod so I was looking at $300 plus so if I could get all those and more for a little more than I don't think it is too high a price.
3. Perhaps as a Time Lord :) you have access to a good 3G network but 3G is not everywhere I want to be yet. I think Steve said 3G is coming? I have been a Cingular customer for years for the GSM capability for use in other parts of the world so I am used to not having 3G and have been OK with that.
4. All phones you get from phone providers are locked to that carrier. I have bought several phones and had them unlocked to whomever I wanted to use. Whether that is a sim card in another country or another carrier. Do we know that the iPhone bought from the Apple store will be locked? I might guess so as long as the Cingular contract is in effect with Apple but after that Apple/Cingular partnership is over than the phone will either be unlocked or multiple carrier options will be offered? Don't know yet. I have speculated that the folks who unlock phones will come up with a way to do the same to this phone. Again don't know but hope so.

barnaby
Jan 11, 2007, 04:45 PM
By the way, we were told we would hear about Leopard's "secret" features. What's the deal?

But we were never told when. Steve will leave the best surprises for last.

barnaby
Jan 11, 2007, 04:46 PM
One thing I'd like to see the Apple TV have is full DVR functionality so it can record live TV. I'm sure many people would like that.

I'm a little sad that only the Apple TV & iPhone were announced. What about iLife/iWork '07? I'm sure that some of their computers are up for an update soon, too. Nothing against the iTV & iPhone, it's just that Apple has other products, too. I wouldn't mind having a 3 hour keynote if it meant more stuff was announced. First hour could be updates to current software (iLife, iWork), 2nd hour being updates to existing hardware and the third hour being the "One more thing…" new products hour. Or something like that. Or maybe 30 minutes update on sales, market share, having sold the n millionth song and stuff. 45 Minutes on updated software, another 45 min. for updated hardware and an hour for new stuff. At least this wasn't like the press event they had when they announced the iPod Hi-Fi speaker. I was like "Uh… yeah, okay. Whatever." To me, the hi-fi isn't such an important product to have so much hoopla over it. Just my 2 cents.

If there are too many things announced, then Apple will have the problem of it's own products competing against themselves. He's got to save surprises for a few weeks down the road when things quiet down. My guess is that iLife and iWork will be announced together with Leopard with a few bonuses to people who use them with Leopard.

MikeTheC
Jan 11, 2007, 05:45 PM
3. Perhaps as a Time Lord :) you have access to a good 3G network but 3G is not everywhere I want to be yet.

Well, yes of course, we have total 3G network coverage. Actually it's 20G, but it is backwards-compatible with 3G. (Well, OK, *technically* there is no cell coverage in the Death Zone, but nobody goes there anyway. ;) )

You should come here and try it sometime.

Somehow this reminds me of a line from Hitchhiker's Guide:

"Oh, for heaven's sake, mankind. Alpha Centauri is only 50 lightyears away."

digitalbiker
Jan 11, 2007, 05:49 PM
:(

It's a sad day indeed when a MacWorld convention is nearly at a close and the only thing dominating the rumor mill network are discussions of a vaporware phone that is at least 6 months from release.

Why couldn't they give us hard-core "Apple Computer" users at least one update to one actual computer. At least they could have hinted at one new computer upgrade or re-design.

Sad:( Sad:( Sad:(

Oh well, I guess I will have to read one of the threads about the iPhone name convtroversy. Oh joy! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

MikeTheC
Jan 11, 2007, 05:56 PM
That's not the point at all. These days, everyone has a telephone in their pocket. What this does is give you an incredible multifunction device without adding any additional bulk to your pocket.

Actually, it is entirely the point. Steve, IIRC, did say something to effect that any kind of this sort of product needs to be a good PHONE first. And I'm not saying that this isn't an awesome *phone*. Apart from the battery runtime, arguably this is the nicest *phone* of any description ever made.


In other words, the phone is an added bonus, not the core function. A Mac can run VOIP software and act as a phone too, but nobody complains about their Mac being a $1000 phone (though, if you think about it, for most people, their computer is really just a $1000 e-mail and web-browsing device).

The phone *is* the core function of this product. Why else would it be called an iPhone?!?!?!?!? And for that matter, the *phone* is the only part most people actually *need*. Everything else is simply extra bells and whistles.

Yes, you're correct that a computer is an expensive phone (via VOIP), and an expensive e-mail and web-browsing product (to say nothing of being an incredibly expensive text messaging device.) However, a Mac is not sold as an email or web-surfing product. It's sold as, and treated as, a computer. It's purpose is to be a multi-function device. With all due respect, you have it the other-way-around.

Also, the phone that you do get with the iPhone is not just a phone. It is fully integrated into the other apps. How many other phones let you search the businesses around your present location and call one of them with a very minimum of effort? Conference call with two touches? E-mail to the person you're talking to? Let you switch off speakerphone without any effort? And so on...

I've never said otherwise. What I have said is that the thing has drawbacks which I feel are universal, and it has certain specific drawbacks which are personal; and any or all of which serve as a dis-incentive for me in regards to buying one.

BillyShears
Jan 11, 2007, 09:19 PM
... a vaporware phone...

Vaporware: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporware) "Vaporware is software or hardware which is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge, either with or without a protracted development cycle. The term implies unwarranted optimism, or sometimes even deception; that is, it may imply that the announcer knows that product development is in too early a stage to support responsible statements about its completion date, feature set, or even feasibility."

The phone's not vaporware until they fail to deliver on any of its promises (especially release date).

The 3GHz G5, on the other hand, could be considered vaporware.

digitalbiker
Jan 11, 2007, 10:29 PM
Vaporware: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporware) "Vaporware is software or hardware which is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge, either with or without a protracted development cycle. The term implies unwarranted optimism, or sometimes even deception; that is, it may imply that the announcer knows that product development is in too early a stage to support responsible statements about its completion date, feature set, or even feasibility."

The phone's not vaporware until they fail to deliver on any of its promises (especially release date).

The 3GHz G5, on the other hand, could be considered vaporware.


OK I'll be a little bit more careful with my rants in the future. I agree that the iPhone won't be vaporware until July if/or when Apple misses the first promised delivery date.

BillyShears
Jan 12, 2007, 01:06 AM
That's cool, sorry if I came across like a jerk. I've been seeing the word "vaporware" thrown around a lot with regards to the iPhone is all.

I understand the frustration you feel, though. We're so used to things being shown to us and then it's available either right off the bat or a month or so after the keynote. It is kind of lame that lately things have been announced (AppleTV, iPhone) but not made available to us quickly.

Evangelion
Jan 12, 2007, 07:23 AM
6. Battery Run-Time -- So, we're talking 16 hours of using the phone as an iPod; 5 hours of using it as a phone; and less than 5 as a Video iPod. That means for me I'd need to keep the d*** thing plugged in all the time. NO -- absolutely not!!! The battery runtime is (for me) 1/2 to 1/3 of what is acceptable. Period.

It's 5 hours of talk-time! 5 hours is quite typical, Nokia's usually run between 2-7 hours, depending on the model. 5 Hours Jobs quoted was NOT the standby-time!

Sheesh....

MikeTheC
Jan 12, 2007, 05:19 PM
It's 5 hours of talk-time! 5 hours is quite typical, Nokia's usually run between 2-7 hours, depending on the model. 5 Hours Jobs quoted was NOT the standby-time!

Sheesh....

So, then, if this is *the* device to revolutionize telephony, and at it's price range, why isn't the runtime longer? Hmm? :)

Glenny2lappies
Jan 12, 2007, 11:29 PM
I generally look forwards to the bi-annual Jobs keynotes in January and August. This has nothing of interest to me: a phone and some video gadget.

Phones are, well, phones. Just a bit of kit that sits in the pocket. The iPhone is a long way off and will be expensive. Sure, it'll be good looking and highly desirable as executive jewelry, but it's still just another phone/PDA.

I just don't get the iTV video thing. It doesn't record from the telly; it can't play DVDs; it doesn't play games... But it will play videos downloaded from the iTunes store. Call me strange, but I've yet to buy anything from iTunes as I find them more expensive than purchasing the CD/DVD - plus there's all the DRM restrictions and low quality rip to put up with. As regards downloading an enormous video... calling a download "video on demand" is really pushing the boundaries of credibility.

What's next from "Apple Inc" - the iBox to play video games? Or the iCarRadio? Or the iGPS?

Please wake me up in six months when there's something interesting and relevant to see. Particularly if it's Mac related - MacRumours = phones & video gadgets, nah.

JoeJoeJoeJoeJoe
Jan 13, 2007, 10:41 PM
I just watched the keynote, and at least one of the Paramount films that were shown in the keynote are not in the iTunes store, The Hunt for Red October caught my eye, and its still not up there, any one have any clue why?

craigverse
Jan 14, 2007, 12:22 AM
Straight from Steve himself at 9:20 during the keynote - "2007 is going to be a great year for the Mac. Over the next several months we're going to roll out some awesome stuff for the Mac. The first thing I'd like to do is give you an update on our music business."

So don't be sad... we've got stuff coming to us... we just need to be patient..

x_X