PDA

View Full Version : The Origins and Development of the iPhone




MacRumors
Jan 9, 2008, 11:24 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Wired magazine (http://www.wired.com/gadgets/wireless/magazine/16-02/ff_iphone?currentPage=1) has a particularly revealing article which details some of the history of the iPhone project within Apple and its unique affect on the wireless industry. With the introduction of the iPhone, manufacturers are racing to produce more phones that appeal directly to consumers rather than to carriers.

Wired manages to get some previously unknown details about the origins of the iPhone project. It began back in 2002, soon after the iPod, when Jobs realized that the convergence of mobile phones and music players would force Apple to get into the mobile phone business.

Apple originally partnered with Motorola which resulted in the ill-fated ROKR iTunes phone, which appeared to be doomed from the start:Jobs likely knew he had a dud on his hands; consumers, for their part, hated it. The ROKR -- which couldn't download music directly and held only 100 songs -- quickly came to represent everything that was wrong with the US wireless industry, the spawn of a mess of conflicting interests for whom the consumer was an afterthought.
In February 2005, Jobs secretly met with Cingular executives, including Stan Sigman. Jobs presented a three-part message to the execs:
- Apple had the technology to build something truly revolutionary, "light-years ahead of anything else."
- Apple was prepared to consider an exclusive arrangement to get that deal done.
- But Apple was also prepared to buy wireless minutes wholesale and become a de facto carrier itself.

Despite the promises, the iPhone project was a major challenge for Apple, requiring over $150 million in development costs. Apple also took extraordinary measures to keep the project secret, with hardware and software teams completely separated, with only 30 people having seen the full device by the time it debuted at Macworld 2007. The decision to use a modified Mac OS X wasn't immediately obvious, and Apple engineers had even seriously considered using Linux.

Other interesting notes from the article:

- The iPhone's codename was P2, short for Purple 2. Purple 1 was an abandoned iPod phone project.
- Apple engineers had spent a year working on touchscreen technology for a Tablet PC. (no other details available in the article)

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/01/10/the-origins-and-development-of-the-iphone/)



arn
Jan 9, 2008, 11:25 PM
everyone should read the full article. it's very interesting.

arn

devilot
Jan 9, 2008, 11:33 PM
Even the iPhone's hardware and software teams were kept apart: Hardware engineers worked on circuitry that was loaded with fake software, while software engineers worked off circuit boards sitting in wooden boxes. By January 2007, when Jobs announced the iPhone at Macworld, only 30 or so of the most senior people on the project had seen it. That's intense. After years of development, so few had actually seen the full product.

Thought the blurbs about what it was like working at Apple corporate leading up to the Keynote and launch were really interesting (the anecdotes and whatnot), but part of me wishes I knew for sure whether or not those were embellished. :p

ericdano
Jan 9, 2008, 11:39 PM
That is all they spent on it? $150 million? Amazing. Microsoft funnels money in multiples of this paltry sum, and they still come out with crap.

lozanoj83
Jan 9, 2008, 11:39 PM
Good article, and wow... screaming Jobs' what a surprise... :p

SAMTATSICPRO
Jan 9, 2008, 11:48 PM
Wow, lots of info and very very interesting.
I wonder if steve was using Cingular all this time and what kind of phone he had to call everyone. maybe he had a mygo or a Pager.

fs454
Jan 9, 2008, 11:53 PM
They spent a year working on Tablet PC tech?

Oh really?

This makes me more confident that a tablet-type Mac will be shown at MWSF.

Adokimus
Jan 9, 2008, 11:57 PM
Very cool stuff. The year working on a tablet is particularly interesting. If anyone can bring tablets mainstream, it will be apple. Very exciting stuff. The idea of a linux iphone was also pretty cool.

-Ado

BWhaler
Jan 10, 2008, 12:00 AM
Great read. I love these insider stories of Jobs and Apple. Great stuff.

InkMaster
Jan 10, 2008, 12:03 AM
def a good read, thanks for the heads up :) - really is amazing how they managed to keep it under the covers for so long :)

neoserver
Jan 10, 2008, 12:03 AM
Incredible. I can't believe the amount of secrecy though. It must have been frustrating at times for the engineers, not knowing what was in the wooden boxes and such.

twoodcc
Jan 10, 2008, 12:05 AM
that's a long article, but it was a nice read.

brewcitywi
Jan 10, 2008, 12:06 AM
Whenever a new product is released and is successful, we as consumers say things like, "oh yeah, of course, the iPhone," as if it's invention was obvious and inevitable.

I think it is SO fascinating to hear about the time before a product's release. Whether it's XBox, or the Wii, there are still very important gaps in the market that companies can find, if they drop the corporate strategy and look at making the consumer experience amazing.

My only "negative" thought is that I hope that Apple wasn't calculating and manipulative in producing the ROKR, in using the experience to learn about the cellphone industry, and take it for themselves. But, I suppose those things happen every day.

However, as the US economy navigates through a potential recession, I think we should look and learn from the courage, innovation, and timing behind such a revolutionary product.

The harder it is to produce something, the greater the scope of it's success.

For some reason, I just have to believe that the energy and ingenuity used to create a groundbreaking new product can be harnessed by any person or company, to go to a new place and have a creative breakthrough.

Yankees 4 Life
Jan 10, 2008, 12:06 AM
that's pretty cool. i would've never guessed that much secrecy was going on.

sachxn
Jan 10, 2008, 12:07 AM
the fact that they worked for a year on tablet pc confirms that Steve will reveal 3.2GHZ touchscreen tablet at 2008 macworld.

Sachin (http://qtp.blogspot.com)

somberlaine
Jan 10, 2008, 12:09 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/3B48b Safari/419.3)

Sounds very credible despite the lack of sources.

jlseattle
Jan 10, 2008, 12:20 AM
The whole company rocks! Thanks Steve Jobs and Thanks Apple!

Phormic
Jan 10, 2008, 12:22 AM
The high stress, pressure cooker, development to a deadline, engineer burn-out genesis of the iPhone sounds very much like the story of the development of the original Macintosh, albeit on a much bigger scale.

It's amazing how such groundbreaking products can come from so much stress and chaos. No wonder Steve gave them all one to say thanks.

zioxide
Jan 10, 2008, 12:22 AM
the fact that they worked for a year on tablet pc confirms that Steve will reveal 3.2GHZ touchscreen tablet at 2008 macworld.

ya, not really.

and no way in hell would a tablet be 3.2GHz right now. maybe in a few years.

wizard
Jan 10, 2008, 12:31 AM
Kinda supports my expressed thoughts that the iPhone is half done. I might even get one when the OS is all there.

As to the software stack on the iPhone, you have to wonder how well everything would be working if the developers had access to hardware through out the development process. It is pretty obvious that the first few software updates from Apple where there to squish bugs.

Dave

FCA
Jan 10, 2008, 12:36 AM
wow..very interesting story...I wonder how that writer got so much insider-disim...lol.
Now I understand at least why the non-Apple applications that are installed in iPhones are recoginized by the system as "Purple Apps"...very genius...inspiring story, looking back at those times it make us look silly but it make us also believers, thanks for the link!

ridli
Jan 10, 2008, 12:40 AM
Great read. I started giggling when reading about the clickwheel mockup that was made. For some reason I kept imagining an alternate reality version of the iphone that used a click wheel to create the world's most advanced rotary phone.

And come on folks, don't go betting the rent money on a touch screen mac next week just because wired mentioned "tablet" in an apple article :)

dwman
Jan 10, 2008, 12:41 AM
5 year exclusivity for AT&T?? :confused: That will keep me from buying the iPhone for a while. :(

PlaceofDis
Jan 10, 2008, 12:42 AM
very interesting read. but shows you the foresight that someone like Jobs has. amazing.

BackInTheSaddle
Jan 10, 2008, 12:45 AM
Only $150 mil for development of the iPhone? That's the bargain of the century...and just imagine what the iPhone and cell industry could look like five years from now, if you use the music industry as a guideline to gauge how much things changed five years after the iPod's intro.

Darkroom
Jan 10, 2008, 12:45 AM
"A product manager slammed the door to her office so hard that the handle bent and locked her in"... geez... not sure i wanna work for Apple anymore... ;)

winmacguy
Jan 10, 2008, 12:46 AM
everyone should read the full article. it's very interesting.

arn

VERY interesting read there arn.:apple:

CalBoy
Jan 10, 2008, 12:50 AM
Simply incredible. I remember reading an article a while back in Newsweek (circa 2005) in which the author claimed that mobile phones with music capability would soon kill the iPod. It shows Jobs' genius by the fact that he had the foresight to plan for this ahead of time. (it also shows just how wrong that article was about iPods, but that's another story).

David G.
Jan 10, 2008, 12:50 AM
If you haven't read it, go read it. NOW! It's that good.

MattInOz
Jan 10, 2008, 12:54 AM
They spent a year working on Tablet PC tech?

Oh really?

This makes me more confident that a tablet-type Mac will be shown at MWSF.

Yes it will the big question is which one 08, 09 or 10?
I guess the answer is the one it's ready for.

the fact that they worked for a year on tablet pc confirms that Steve will reveal 3.2GHZ touchscreen tablet at 2008 macworld.

Sachin (http://qtp.blogspot.com)

Does two cores running at 1.6GHz count?

MacFly123
Jan 10, 2008, 01:08 AM
the fact that they worked for a year on tablet pc confirms that Steve will reveal 3.2GHZ touchscreen tablet at 2008 macworld.

Sachin (http://qtp.blogspot.com)

They spent a year working on Tablet PC tech?

Oh really?

This makes me more confident that a tablet-type Mac will be shown at MWSF.

Not to mention they said they could "make a similar interface for a phone". That means the iPhone interface really comes from the Apple Tablet :) I can't wait for them to announce it! My guess is MWSF '09 but I hope it is next week :) And I wonder if iPhone 2 will have a new Multi-Touch screen like with the pressure stuff Apple is working on since they had been creating the current iPhone/Tablet screen for years.

Kinda supports my expressed thoughts that the iPhone is half done. I might even get one when the OS is all there.

As to the software stack on the iPhone, you have to wonder how well everything would be working if the developers had access to hardware through out the development process. It is pretty obvious that the first few software updates from Apple where there to squish bugs.

Dave

I guess I can cut them a little slack now about the underwhelming iPhone updates so far. I had no idea how much work all of it really truly is. I'm sure now that they have it more solid they will be adding the features etc. And who knows what they are going crazy working on for 5 years down the road now :) I love Apple :D

maxp1
Jan 10, 2008, 01:23 AM
Ok, so who was putting the fake programming in the devices that were being given to the hardware teams? Apple must have a anti-espionage division.

I'm also amazed that they could come out with a functional device at all with separate teams like that.

zephead
Jan 10, 2008, 01:25 AM
Very interesting. It's always cool to see behind-the-scenes of anything, just to see how the people were when they were making it, how much it took out of them, or what a typical day would be like for them. I liked the bit about engineers quitting, catching up on their sleep, and rejoining days later. And it's always way scarier when someone who usually looks furious when they yell to look incredibly calm but have every word pierce through you tenfold.

They don't expound very much on the Apple-Verizon negotiations, though. I would've liked to read more about how that fell through.

havand
Jan 10, 2008, 01:42 AM
I can't believe how much money apple gets from these things. $400+$240 per contract?? That's WITHOUT accessories. What was their estimated cost to build, 200? (really stretching the memory on that one, not at all confident).

I'm so frustrated with our cellphone industry in the U.S. Compared to the rest of the world, we're so backwards and are being abused left and right by the carriers. Why can't I buy a phone and THEN pick my carrier based on if my phone is GSM or CDMA? Makes no sense. I think the cellphone marketing strategy should be for a set fee. Ie, you pay $40/month and that includes all data, texts, and as many minutes, within the U.S., as you can use. I don't get all the 'minutes' crap.

Misplaced Mage
Jan 10, 2008, 01:47 AM
Only $150 mil for development of the iPhone? That's the bargain of the century...and just imagine what the iPhone and cell industry could look like five years from now, if you use the music industry as a guideline to gauge how much things changed five years after the iPod's intro.$150 million was roughly one order of magnitude more than the typical cell phone development program ran at the time. A large chuck of that $150 million, however, probably went into capital expenditure for all the new test equipment needed, not just for the development labs, but for the production line(s), too. Apple will be able to amortize some of those costs over the next couple of iPhone product as the equipment won't change, e.g., those robotic antenna test chambers are extremely expensive to initially set up and calibrate (even Motorola has just three of them at their main cell phone development site: they're run round-the-clock), but after that they just need periodic re-calibration and hardware & software updates.

Yankees 4 Life
Jan 10, 2008, 01:52 AM
just read the article. that was an amazing read.

Full of Win
Jan 10, 2008, 01:54 AM
Apple is really giving you a big Steve Screwjob, since it only cost 200$ to make the handset that they sell for 400$

This is one of the reasons the handset cost so much - R&D.

Misplaced Mage
Jan 10, 2008, 01:57 AM
"A product manager slammed the door to her office so hard that the handle bent and locked her in"... geez... not sure i wanna work for Apple anymore... ;)Apple may be an extreme case, but I can personally testify that when there are rapidly-approaching delivery deadlines and large sums of non-recoverable funds invested in the development of a product, it's pretty much par for the course. :cool:

BornAgainMac
Jan 10, 2008, 01:57 AM
The current phone industry reminds me of PCs and what would happen if the Mac never came out and everyone only used DOS, CP/M, and all the other command line systems of the 80's. I guess they are the only ones with a vision, that is sad.

SthrnCmfrtr
Jan 10, 2008, 02:06 AM
Nice. Apple more than recovered their R&D costs just from the amount they got from AT&T. The extra amount paid by the early adopters (like me), the AT&T income, and the profit from each unit gives them a very nice cushion. They can cut costs on an iPhone mini/nano and they also have a lot of room for price wars and contract renegotiations with AT&T.

Any other company is going to have to charge more for their competing devices in order to recover their own R&D costs, likely making them cost more than the iPhone -- and have the shortcomings and warts that the iPhone had at introduction, six months or a year prior. So it'll be like they're coming out with iPhone knock-offs, a year later, and at a higher price than the iPhone. If these companies cut their price to try and steal the iPhone's thunder, they just plain won't make enough money to sustain its profitability.

Perhaps that was the reason for the "early adopter" tax and the draconian terms with AT&T -- recover the R&D early while the competition is still reeling, then provide a cushion to remain not only the most powerful and attractive offering, but also reasonably-priced.

IgniFerroque
Jan 10, 2008, 02:08 AM
"and its unique affect on the wireless industry."

should be

"and its unique effect on the wireless industry."

(now I can sleep)

dante@sisna.com
Jan 10, 2008, 02:10 AM
They spent a year working on Tablet PC tech?

Oh really?

This makes me more confident that a tablet-type Mac will be shown at MWSF.

Very observant.

I spotted the same thing and drew the same conclusion.

Dante

Misplaced Mage
Jan 10, 2008, 02:20 AM
Apple is really giving you a big Steve Screwjob, since it only cost 200$ to make the handset that they sell for 400$

This is one of the reasons the handset cost so much - R&D.Got it in one. Putting a computer next to an extremely sensitive radio receiver (which is any cell phone) and keeping both from interfering with each other is still very much a black art, especially on the radio side of things since you now have potentially three transmitters (cellular, Wifi, Bluetooth) and four receivers (cellular, Wifi, Bluetooth, GPS) operating simultaneously. Throw in a digital camera (got to tune the auto white- and color-balance for the lens stack used), a metal case (more work for the radio engineers and a magnet for static discharges), USB 2.0 port (sitting right next to the antennas, of all places!), and a truly huge slew of carrier (AT&T, Orange, T-Mobile, and O2 for the iPhone), industry (CTIA), federal (FCC), and international (GSM Association) standards that a phone needs to meet before it can ship, and it's a minor miracle that these things frequently ship on time.

dante@sisna.com
Jan 10, 2008, 02:33 AM
everyone should read the full article. it's very interesting.

arn

This is an AMAZING Business Innovation article about Apple, the iPhone, and Steve Jobs. Worth the Read. Fascinating.

Dante

I Am Designer™
Jan 10, 2008, 02:39 AM
"...Apple was also prepared to buy wireless minutes wholesale and become a de facto carrier itself..."

If only they had stuck to this... The one thing that puts me off the iPhone is carrier choice.

Imagine Apple as Software / Hardware developer of the iPhone AND the carrier - could only be a good thing. Yes, they would have to spend more on call centre support etc for the device, and the wider reach of retail outlets of the carriers gives them better sales coverage - but there are other companies out there doing it successfully.

It makes me wonder why they would want to introduce a 3rd party?, especially greedy carriers who don't have consumer experience at their core...

Stridder44
Jan 10, 2008, 02:40 AM
Holy crap that is a damn good article.

I love reading about what really happens.

Pukey
Jan 10, 2008, 02:43 AM
"They built a prototype of a phone, embedded on an iPod, that used the clickwheel as a dialer, but it could only select and dial numbers — not surf the Net."

Great read. I started giggling when reading about the clickwheel mockup that was made. For some reason I kept imagining an alternate reality version of the iphone that used a click wheel to create the world's most advanced rotary phone.

And come on folks, don't go betting the rent money on a touch screen mac next week just because wired mentioned "tablet" in an apple article :)

Hahaha! I was thinking along the same lines. It reminded me of this spoof mock up I had seen before the iPhone came out when everyone was making their mock ups of what they thought it would look like.
That was a great article. Thanks for the link MacRumors! It's always interesting to see the inner workings of innovative companies like Apple and what the process is.

Misplaced Mage
Jan 10, 2008, 02:45 AM
The current phone industry reminds me of PCs and what would happen if the Mac never came out and everyone only used DOS, CP/M, and all the other command line systems of the 80's. I guess they are the only ones with a vision, that is sad.Apple had the benefit of designing a cell phone tabula rasa. The other cell phone manufacturers are very much like Microsoft and Windows: they've spent decades developing constantly evolving hardware and software, and typically look to leverage previous work as much as possible. Backwards compatibility -- in both hardware and software -- is thus a serious plus, profit-wise, but it can result in rather slow progress in certain areas.

There's no practical reason other manufacturers can't take the same approach Apple did, but it's a huge financial risk: what if the initial product doesn't sell well? Few companies have the cash on hand that Apple, much less Microsoft have to absorb a serious bomb, or a singular visionary leader to drive development.

Pukey
Jan 10, 2008, 02:48 AM
"...Apple was also prepared to buy wireless minutes wholesale and become a de facto carrier itself..."

If only they had stuck to this... The one thing that puts me off the iPhone is carrier choice.

Imagine Apple as Software / Hardware developer of the iPhone AND the carrier - could only be a good thing. Yes, they would have to spend more on call centre support etc for the device, and the wider reach of retail outlets of the carriers gives them better sales coverage - but there are other companies out there doing it successfully.

It makes me wonder why they would want to introduce a 3rd party?, especially greedy carriers who don't have consumer experience at their core...

I definitely agree. That would have been so nice to see Apple as the carrier. If that had been the case, I would probably have an iPhone provided it was a reasonable rate. As things are though, I would not go with AT&T.

Misplaced Mage
Jan 10, 2008, 02:56 AM
"...Apple was also prepared to buy wireless minutes wholesale and become a de facto carrier itself..."

If only they had stuck to this... The one thing that puts me off the iPhone is carrier choice.For Apple to sell a single "world-phone" and not multiple versions of the same phone, it was never going to have very many choices in domestic carriers since it was limited to GSM. That immediately narrowed the choices down to AT&T/Cingular and T-Mobile.

Imagine Apple as Software / Hardware developer of the iPhone AND the carrier - could only be a good thing. Yes, they would have to spend more on call centre support etc for the device, and the wider reach of retail outlets of the carriers gives them better sales coverage - but there are other companies out there doing it successfully.

It makes me wonder why they would want to introduce a 3rd party?, especially greedy carriers who don't have consumer experience at their core...Mobile Virtual Network Operators (MVNOs) have a spotty track record. Remember ESPN's? Disney's? Amp'd? Virgin Mobile is one of the very few successful ones. And MVNOs still run on the same network as their parent carriers, and thus share the exact same limitations. This way, Apple only has to worry about the hardware and software, while its carrier partners deal with all the network-related issues.

Evangelion
Jan 10, 2008, 03:00 AM
I find it interesting that the engineers considered Linux for the phone, but SJ overturned them. And the tidbit about "Tablet PC" was very interesting...

SJ said last year that "most innovation is going to take place in post-PC-devices like the iPhone and the iPod". I wouldn't be one bit surprised if we saw more "post-PC"-devices from Apple in few days ;)....

andrewag
Jan 10, 2008, 03:07 AM
Great article.

It's practical to see that there was an evolution of touchscreen technologies for future products (even if they don't turn into "tablet pcs").

Project
Jan 10, 2008, 03:09 AM
This is why those iSuppli product breakdowns annoy me. Coming out with headlines that the iPhone only cost $200 to make and thus Apple is taking huge margins on them..

While $150m might sound trivial to Apple, its the equivalent of adding an extra $150 to the cost of the iPhone for the first 1m sales. And r&D costs need to be recovered if possible as they are a business.

And thats just pre launch R&D. It doesnt take into account ongoing sotware development costs, training, marketing, website upkeep, sales (retail stores and whatnot)


But yeah, this was a great article. I wish Jobs still created those videos of internal meetings like he did 20 years ago at NeXT. Apples creative process is one of the most interesting things about the company.

daneoni
Jan 10, 2008, 03:30 AM
epic article....needs to be made into a documentary

RealMcCoy
Jan 10, 2008, 03:40 AM
Mark my words: On tuesday ... iPhone Version 2 (whatever name it will be) !

elgruga
Jan 10, 2008, 03:41 AM
Its interesting to see how few people realise that Jobs is actually somewhat special.
Perhaps we think that other cell phone manufacturers could do something like the iPhone, but they really can NOT.

The controlling world is stronger than ever, but Jobs is not caught by it.

They always have excuses for not developing new products that people can really use, but the main reason is FEAR.
Watch Gates and his quivering little-greedy-boy performance at CES in Vegas, then compare with the adult Jobs at MacWorld.
One is a fearful, tight-fisted creature, the other is unafraid and clear-sighted.

Apple's brilliance is about Jobs, and there are precious few like him, sadly for our various societies around the globe.

I wish Apple would design a car, a house, a system for growing vegetables in urban settings, a bicycle, etc. etc.

With such clear vision, they could improve almost anything.

Consider the cell phone and how long you put up with crap. Apple stopped that with iPhone.

There are lots of things like that - look at the bicycle chain and gear system - its amazingly crappy, and over 150 years old, but there is no impetus to change it.

Look at hybrid cars - they are supposed to be so great, but they are dull and not as gas efficient as they should/could be.

Its fear and greed that dominate our world, and Apple and Jobs do their bit to defeat it with their human-centered products.

sunfast
Jan 10, 2008, 04:26 AM
It's a fascinating article - especially about the new balance of power.

However, I fail to see why lack of carrier subsidy hands power to consumers. If I get an iPhone (likely before too long) I will break the habit of a lifetime by paying for a handset.

Pukey
Jan 10, 2008, 04:30 AM
I find it interesting that the engineers considered Linux for the phone, but SJ overturned them. And the tidbit about "Tablet PC" was very interesting...

SJ said last year that "most innovation is going to take place in post-PC-devices like the iPhone and the iPod". I wouldn't be one bit surprised if we saw more "post-PC"-devices from Apple in few days ;)....

Yeah, it's kind of scary to hear "Post PC", assuming PC means all computers or all Apple computers. Is it just me or does that sound like Jobs wants to move the focus of Apple from computers to other things? For example, taking the name Computers out of "Apple Computers"? Not that I have any problem with the iPhone, I think it's a great innovation. I would just hate to see Apple take their focus off what always was their main staple, computers.

OllyW
Jan 10, 2008, 05:13 AM
However, I fail to see why lack of carrier subsidy hands power to consumers. If I get an iPhone (likely before too long) I will break the habit of a lifetime by paying for a handset.

I don't get that either. In the UK you are still tied to O2 for 18 months, with a poor value contract and you have to pay full price for the phone. As I see it, O2 still has the power :confused:

Very interesting article though. I'm always impressed with the attention to detail that the Apple design team gives to new products.

Evangelion
Jan 10, 2008, 05:13 AM
Yeah, it's kind of scary to hear "Post PC", assuming PC means all computers or all Apple computers. Is it just me or does that sound like Jobs wants to move the focus of Apple from computers to other things? For example, taking the name Computers out of "Apple Computers"? Not that I have any problem with the iPhone, I think it's a great innovation. I would just hate to see Apple take their focus off what always was their main staple, computers.

I think the reality is a bit more complex than that, and less worrisome :). Think about it: We got personal computers in the early eighties. And since then, things haven't progressed that much. Sure, we have A LOT more powerful computer these days, but if you look at the latest iMac and the original Macintosh, you can see the clear resemblance. Not only in the computer and the peripherals, but in the UI as well.

When SJ said that innovation will take place in "post-PC"-devices, he did not mean that Apple is going to move away from computers. He just acknowledged the fact that in the future it will be other devices than the computer which are going to change our lives. That in the future we will be accessing information with other devices besides computers. Computers changed our lives in many ways since they appeared in the eighties. But that change is more or less over now. We are living in the "PC world" so to speak. the next wave of change is going to come from those "post-PC"-devices.

Computers will be around for a long time, both in the society and at Apple. But the fact is that computers are "old". The concept has not really progressed at all from the mid eighties or so. Innovation is happening elsewhere, with computers we basically have refinement of 20+ year old technology.

Taking "computer" away from "Apple Computer" made sense. Like SJ said: large part of their business does not come from computers anymore, so calling the company "Apple Computer" would have been somewhat misleading. Note: that does not mean that they are moving away from computers. It just means that they have other sources of income these days than just omputers. And there's nothing wrong with that. And if you look at all the devices and services Apple sells, you will see that they all have one thing in common: they need a computer. Computers are absolutely essential to Apple, and they will NOT be abandoning them.

page3
Jan 10, 2008, 05:24 AM
I don't get that either. In the UK you are still tied to O2 for 18 months, with a poor value contract and you have to pay full price for the phone. As I see it, O2 still has the power :confused:...or an excellent value package. It all depends on your call/text/data habits. Although I don't deny O2 still seem to have a disproportional amount of power.

aswitcher
Jan 10, 2008, 05:26 AM
Very observant.

I spotted the same thing and drew the same conclusion.

Dante

Surely something this year based upon that.

epic article....needs to be made into a documentary

iPyrates of Silicon Valley 2

danielpi
Jan 10, 2008, 05:57 AM
It's a fascinating article - especially about the new balance of power.

However, I fail to see why lack of carrier subsidy hands power to consumers. If I get an iPhone (likely before too long) I will break the habit of a lifetime by paying for a handset.

The idea is that the jerkwad phone companies are the ones that set the exorbitant prices (not manufacturers) for their crappy little phones, and then they will pay for the "expensive" handset, as long as you sign your soul to them for two years. Of course, they're not really paying Nokia or LG or anyone the "list price" -- they just made whatever astronomically high number they wanted, so it seems like you're getting a real bargain when you sign up with them. The phones themselves cost practically nothing to produce, with minimal R&D.

So, the trick is this: Nokia makes a $20 phone (that is, it costs $20 to manufacture). AT&T advises Nokia that the phone is worth $100. Nokia sets the price at $100. AT&T will offer to GIVE you the phone, if you sign up with AT&T. AT&T pays Nokia maybe something like $30 for the phone. You think you've saved $100. Your first monthly bill is $80, of which $49 is profit for AT&T, after they paid Nokia. Each subsequent bill is $79 of pure profit.

The difference with iPhone (and the reason that AT&T isn't giving them out if you sign up) is that 1) Apple set the price, not AT&T; 2) Apple actually expects to get $400 for every iPhone they sell (minus whatever percentage for phones sold in AT&T stores); and 3) The iPhone actually is a $400 phone. That is to say, the cost to research, develop, manufacture, and garner a (reasonable) profit makes $400 a sensible price -- no "wiggle room" for AT&T.

Abstract
Jan 10, 2008, 06:02 AM
Ok, so who was putting the fake programming in the devices that were being given to the hardware teams? Apple must have a anti-espionage division.

"Hello world".

Evangelion
Jan 10, 2008, 06:14 AM
So, the trick is this: Nokia makes a $20 phone (that is, it costs $20 to manufacture). AT&T advises Nokia that the phone is worth $100. Nokia sets the price at $100. AT&T will offer to GIVE you the phone, if you sign up with AT&T. AT&T pays Nokia maybe something like $30 for the phone. You think you've saved $100. Your first monthly bill is $80, of which $49 is profit for AT&T, after they paid Nokia. Each subsequent bill is $79 of pure profit.

I don't think so. Over here (Finland) the sales of subscriptions and sales of handsets was strictly separated for years. In fact, it was illegal to bundle the two in to "sign up for x years, get phone for free!"-type deals. You bought the phone separately, and then you could shop around for a suitable subscription. And the prices of the phones weren't that low when compared to other countries where bundling phones and subscriptions was the norm.

As it happens, Nokia got in to the trouble in USA (in case you missed it, Nokia's market-share in USA is a fraction of what it is in other parts of the world) is because they refused to satisfy the demands of the operators. Their exec went on the record and said "we want to sell phones that consumers want, not phones that operators want". End-result was that operators didn't carry their phones, and their market-share tanked.

Manic Mouse
Jan 10, 2008, 06:16 AM
The iPhone actually is a $400 phone. That is to say, the cost to research, develop, manufacture, and garner a (reasonable) profit makes $400 a sensible price

Don't forget, it's not $400. It's $400 plus whatever Apple get over the contract length. Which no other phone manufacturer asks for.

You're extolling Apple as if they're some benevolent God coming to save us from evil Nokia and Sony Ericsson. Which is pretty much the opposite of what's actually happening, the iPhone is the most expensive phone ever produced. To own one in the UK you have to sign up to the most horrible contract in the entire industry, where you pay twice as much as others and get half as much for your money. I don't personally think that's such a great thing...

Evangelion
Jan 10, 2008, 06:19 AM
You're extolling Apple as if they're some benevolent God coming to save us from evil Nokia and Sony Ericsson. Which is pretty much the opposite of what's actually happening, the iPhone is the most expensive phone ever produced.

More expensive than Vertu (http://vertu.com/en/?)

Manic Mouse
Jan 10, 2008, 06:20 AM
More expensive than Vertu (http://vertu.com/en/?)

But do you have to sell your soul to Steve Jobs to own one? I think not! :p

Evangelion
Jan 10, 2008, 06:23 AM
But do you have to sell your soul to Steve Jobs to own one? I think not! :p

Do you have to sell your soul to SJ in order to get an iPhone?

mccldwll
Jan 10, 2008, 06:27 AM
I can't believe how much money apple gets from these things. $400+$240 per contract?? That's WITHOUT accessories. What was their estimated cost to build, 200? (really stretching the memory on that one, not at all confident).



Don't believe everything you read. Ever. It's an interesting, nicely written story pieced together from many "not so inside" sources, but there are details in the story (such as costs, revenue sharing and five year exclusivity) which are pure speculation. Sort of like watching a movie about Moses. The following from the story should give everyone a heads-up:

"(Details of this and other key moments in the making of the iPhone were provided by people with knowledge of the events. Apple and AT&T would not discuss these meetings or the specific terms of the relationship.)"

bigandy
Jan 10, 2008, 06:42 AM
Does two cores running at 1.6GHz count?
MacRumors isn't the vacuum of knowledge and common sense that is eBay, so no, two 1.6Ghz cores does not equal 3.2Ghz.

macmike47
Jan 10, 2008, 06:45 AM
Hardware engineers worked on circuitry that was loaded with fake software, while software engineers worked off circuit boards sitting in wooden boxes..

People who are serious about software should make their own hardware.

Surely having hardware and software teams separated goes right against this philosophy. :confused:

But I'm not complaining. It worked out in the end didn't it! :D

mccldwll
Jan 10, 2008, 06:47 AM
Don't forget, it's not $400. It's $400 plus whatever Apple get over the contract length. Which no other phone manufacturer asks for.

You're extolling Apple as if they're some benevolent God coming to save us from evil Nokia and Sony Ericsson. Which is pretty much the opposite of what's actually happening, the iPhone is the most expensive phone ever produced. .

LOL. Sounds like Ballmer!
The iPhone is far from the most expensive phone ever made, and for what you get, if you can use it, it's the best deal out there. If they weren't being marketed to a very large audience which allows apple to recoup development costs in smaller chunks/phone, you're looking at a $1000 device. Easy. Jobs has sold iPhones to soccer moms and others who never would buy an extremely sophisticated handheld computer, in the guise of an easy to operate, beautifully designed ipod/phone. And stop complaining about whatever apple may be getting from the carrier on the monthly contracts. It's from the carrier, not from you. In the U.S. at least, $20/month over the cost of the basic calling plan for free garbage phones, to get internet/unlimited data, etc. is a bargain.

jouster
Jan 10, 2008, 06:57 AM
They spent a year working on Tablet PC tech?

Oh really?

This makes me more confident that a tablet-type Mac will be shown at MWSF.

Despite Jobs's reasons for not building one?

Well, I hope you're right.

It's a fascinating article - especially about the new balance of power.

However, I fail to see why lack of carrier subsidy hands power to consumers.

It doesn't. It hands some to the device manufacturers, which is what the article states.


You're extolling Apple as if they're some benevolent God coming to save us from evil Nokia and Sony Ericsson. Which is pretty much the opposite of what's actually happening.....

You consider Sony and Nokia to be benevolent gods? Interesting.

Fabio_gsilva
Jan 10, 2008, 07:06 AM
"...Apple was also prepared to buy wireless minutes wholesale and become a de facto carrier itself..."

If only they had stuck to this... The one thing that puts me off the iPhone is carrier choice.

Imagine Apple as Software / Hardware developer of the iPhone AND the carrier - could only be a good thing. Yes, they would have to spend more on call centre support etc for the device, and the wider reach of retail outlets of the carriers gives them better sales coverage - but there are other companies out there doing it successfully.

It makes me wonder why they would want to introduce a 3rd party?, especially greedy carriers who don't have consumer experience at their core...

Well, I could imagine a lot of people here complaining on day one that Apple Carrier sucks so much, because a loto of certain city still uncovered, that the plans are too expensive, that it would be better to go with AT&T or another big carrier...

Oh-es-Ten
Jan 10, 2008, 07:06 AM
Kinda supports my expressed thoughts that the iPhone is half done. I might even get one when the OS is all there.

As to the software stack on the iPhone, you have to wonder how well everything would be working if the developers had access to hardware through out the development process. It is pretty obvious that the first few software updates from Apple where there to squish bugs.

Dave

As far as the using the iPhone, it does not feel 'half done' at all to me. If this is half done, then it is 'half done' Apple style, with half as many issues and crashes as anyone else's 'half done'! I am truly amazed given the time pressures to get this thing out, they were able to produce something so excellent.

The fact that there has not been a great deal of software updates since (minor ones), tells me that something nice is brewing there, and hopefully we should see a very tasty update next week... Fingers crossed anyway.

freakpod
Jan 10, 2008, 07:11 AM
good article! thanx for posting.:)

OllyW
Jan 10, 2008, 07:12 AM
And stop complaining about whatever apple may be getting from the carrier on the monthly contracts. It's from the carrier, not from you. In the U.S. at least, $20/month over the cost of the basic calling plan for free garbage phones, to get internet/unlimited data, etc. is a bargain.

Sadly, this is not the case in Europe.

The operators have passed Apple's monthly cut on to the customer, resulting in poor value packages.

Rodimus Prime
Jan 10, 2008, 07:21 AM
I can't believe how much money apple gets from these things. $400+$240 per contract?? That's WITHOUT accessories. What was their estimated cost to build, 200? (really stretching the memory on that one, not at all confident).

I'm so frustrated with our cellphone industry in the U.S. Compared to the rest of the world, we're so backwards and are being abused left and right by the carriers. Why can't I buy a phone and THEN pick my carrier based on if my phone is GSM or CDMA? Makes no sense. I think the cellphone marketing strategy should be for a set fee. Ie, you pay $40/month and that includes all data, texts, and as many minutes, within the U.S., as you can use. I don't get all the 'minutes' crap.

well you can buy your phone then pick your carrier if you want for the GSM phones. Just it is going to cost you quite a bit more money to get the phone because it is not be subsidized by the providers.

Breckenridge
Jan 10, 2008, 07:22 AM
I really don't think the iPhone is that special, I was more productive with my treo and now since I switched to the iPhone I miss my treo. I cannot download email attachments and save locally on the phone. It takes 3 clicks to get to the number pad, so making a phone call can be a bit more tasking than using any other phone. Copy / Paste ? Send a file wirelessly from one iPhone to another? video recording? Ability to edit a word or excel document?

The iPhone still lacks some serious software upgrades to become a productive business phone.

elppa
Jan 10, 2008, 07:24 AM
There are lots of things like that - look at the bicycle chain and gear system - its amazingly crappy, and over 150 years old, but there is no impetus to change it.

Off topic.

There has been a lot of change in this area. New materials, much thinner chains and now, electronic transmission.

Bad example. Plus hub gears are popular on city bikes due to the low maintance nature of them. City bikes in the Netherlands almost exclusively use hub gears.

Bad example.

techgeek
Jan 10, 2008, 07:32 AM
... The phones themselves cost practically nothing to produce, with minimal R&D. ...


This is not true.
I write embedded software for mobile phones. I've worked for several big manufacturers.
Generally a development cycle will take 12-18 months and involve hundreds of people in engineering (software, hardware and ASICs), test, type approval, marketing etc. across multiple countries and multiple companies. The outcome of this cycle will be a handful of handset models all based on the common "platform" all with different plastics and feature sets and selling at different price points. These models will be released (with upgrades over time - the engineering doesn't stop completely) while the next development cycle runs and the next "platform" is created.
The big manufacturers will have several such cycles in progress at any one time (based on different chipsets and different OS's such as Symbian, Windows mobile or RTOS).
The R&D between two models on a common platform will be minimal, but between platforms it is very large.

The handset manufacture is also not trivial once you consider re-tooling a factory to produce the different designs for the circuit boards and populating them and making all the different cases.

Popeye206
Jan 10, 2008, 07:41 AM
What's interesting about Steve (and Apple) is his insight to see that what they did was junk (with the first iPod enabled phone) and look at their resources and turn a mistake into gold. It's that sort of insight and innovation that makes Apple shine. Now we wait for more... is it Tuesday yet?

sunfast
Jan 10, 2008, 07:43 AM
The idea is that the jerkwad phone companies are the ones that set the exorbitant prices (not manufacturers) for their crappy little phones, and then they will pay for the "expensive" handset, as long as you sign your soul to them for two years. Of course, they're not really paying Nokia or LG or anyone the "list price" -- they just made whatever astronomically high number they wanted, so it seems like you're getting a real bargain when you sign up with them. The phones themselves cost practically nothing to produce, with minimal R&D.

So, the trick is this: Nokia makes a $20 phone (that is, it costs $20 to manufacture). AT&T advises Nokia that the phone is worth $100. Nokia sets the price at $100. AT&T will offer to GIVE you the phone, if you sign up with AT&T. AT&T pays Nokia maybe something like $30 for the phone. You think you've saved $100. Your first monthly bill is $80, of which $49 is profit for AT&T, after they paid Nokia. Each subsequent bill is $79 of pure profit.

The difference with iPhone (and the reason that AT&T isn't giving them out if you sign up) is that 1) Apple set the price, not AT&T; 2) Apple actually expects to get $400 for every iPhone they sell (minus whatever percentage for phones sold in AT&T stores); and 3) The iPhone actually is a $400 phone. That is to say, the cost to research, develop, manufacture, and garner a (reasonable) profit makes $400 a sensible price -- no "wiggle room" for AT&T.

I suppose where I'm struggling is that the phones I've had for free cost a lot "sim-free". For example I was once given two RAZRs (not a great phone I know, but this was nearly 3 years ago). My k800i was free over a year ago and my contract doesn't cost a fortune.

It doesn't. It hands some to the device manufacturers, which is what the article states.

You are quite right. However, the point I tried to make and completely failed to get across, is that the article seems to suggest (to me at least) that the way the iPhone has shaken up the mobile industry is a positive thing.

IMO it has done completely the opposite. UK customers are being held to ransom over the iPhone with truly disproportionate fees. If it wasn't such an incredible product, nobody would consider it. Yes, of course I can look elsewhere and nobody is making me purchase one but I worry that it is setting a dangerous precedent for the UK phone market - let's make an attractive "must have" handset and see how much we can fleece people who are keen to get one.

Dagless
Jan 10, 2008, 08:02 AM
So much dislike for the ROKR. I used one for a few months (before trading it for a RAZR) and thought it was a nice phone with a very nice speaker(s). And that vibe/tone feature was surprisingly nice on the hand.

Course I'm still so much in love with my old RAZR that it's still holding me back from an iPhone.

Evangelion
Jan 10, 2008, 08:04 AM
Surely having hardware and software teams separated goes right against this philosophy. :confused:

Not really. The teams still had all the information they really needed, they just didn't know every intricate detail. Even though there were individual person who did not know everything, Apple as a whole did know.

chris315
Jan 10, 2008, 08:11 AM
Yes it will the big question is which one 08, 09 or 10?
I guess the answer is the one it's ready for.



Does two cores running at 1.6GHz count?

Your not supposed to add up the frequency of both cores

kornyboy
Jan 10, 2008, 08:47 AM
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/3B48b Safari/419.3)

I wonder what they tried with Purple 1 and why it eventually was abandoned. This is really interesting stuff.

Hard-Hat-Mac
Jan 10, 2008, 08:50 AM
I really don't think the iPhone is that special, I was more productive with my treo and now since I switched to the iPhone I miss my treo. I cannot download email attachments and save locally on the phone. It takes 3 clicks to get to the number pad, so making a phone call can be a bit more tasking than using any other phone. Copy / Paste ? Send a file wirelessly from one iPhone to another? video recording? Ability to edit a word or excel document?

The iPhone still lacks some serious software upgrades to become a productive business phone.

Then go get your treo back. The iOhone is a smart phone for the general public, not for the CEOs.... yet

elppa
Jan 10, 2008, 09:03 AM
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/3B48b Safari/419.3)

I wonder what they tried with Purple 1 and why it eventually was abandoned. This is really interesting stuff.

I think it was an iPod with phone functionality thrown in. No where near as revolutionary as 2007s iPhone. It probably still would have sold though.

tgildred
Jan 10, 2008, 09:07 AM
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/3B48b Safari/419.3)

I wonder what they tried with Purple 1 and why it eventually was abandoned. This is really interesting stuff.

The first iPhone attempts came out horribly deformed. Eventually they ended up with Purple 2, a perfect hybrid of iPod and phone...

jdee2wheels
Jan 10, 2008, 09:11 AM
There are lots of things like that - look at the bicycle chain and gear system - its amazingly crappy, and over 150 years old, but there is no impetus to change it.

Actually, the number of patents on bicycle transmissions would make your head spin. People have been working on trying to find an alternative to the chain driven bicycle forever. There are plenty of commuter bikes that now have internal transmission but you won't see any of this on high end bikes. Unfortunately with less than a 1/2 horsepower motor (your legs) all these fancy high tech transmissions suck when compared to the efficiency of a chain and cogs. Sometimes there is a reason why a technology sticks around.

pseudonymph
Jan 10, 2008, 09:17 AM
Ability to edit a word or excel document?

i see this brought up all the time but seriously editing a spreadsheet would be the last thing i would want to do on a phone/pda.

megfilmworks
Jan 10, 2008, 09:20 AM
I really don't think the iPhone is that special, I was more productive with my treo and now since I switched to the iPhone I miss my treo.
I love a good laugh in the morning.

Unspeaked
Jan 10, 2008, 09:26 AM
Only $150 mil for development of the iPhone? That's the bargain of the century...and just imagine what the iPhone and cell industry could look like five years from now, if you use the music industry as a guideline to gauge how much things changed five years after the iPod's intro.

You mean crazy CEOs will be pulling even crazier ideas out of a hat to combat all-time-low sales and companies on the verge of bankruptcy?

:D

plumbingandtech
Jan 10, 2008, 09:47 AM
I really don't think the iPhone is that special, I was more productive with my treo and now since I switched to the iPhone I miss my treo. I cannot download email attachments and save locally on the phone. It takes 3 clicks to get to the number pad, so making a phone call can be a bit more tasking than using any other phone. Copy / Paste ? Send a file wirelessly from one iPhone to another? video recording? Ability to edit a word or excel document?

The iPhone still lacks some serious software upgrades to become a productive business phone.

Good one! oh wait. You really mean that you think a treo is in the same league as the iphone? Well I guess you are write. And my old AMC Gremlim was a car just like a BMW 5 series.

ungraphic
Jan 10, 2008, 09:56 AM
In February 2005, Jobs secretly met with Cingular executives, including Stan Sigman. Jobs presented a three-part message to the execs:

- Apple had the technology to build something truly revolutionary, "light-years ahead of anything else."
- Apple was prepared to consider an exclusive arrangement to get that deal done.
- But Apple was also prepared to buy wireless minutes wholesale and become a de facto carrier itself.



I can imagine how much ************ he had to feed them with his 'reality distortian field.' Steve Jobs is the greatest spin doctor to have ever walked the face of the earth. If theres anyone greater at exaggerating a product, please give me a name.

Also, the iphone is hardly revolutionary. Late, is what it is, the only thing its got thats revolutionary is a multi-touch interface, and lack of tactile keys, which makes it a crappy product. Also, aesthetically, it looks like ass, hardly represents the usual 'apple' look. Jonathan Ive must be glad that at least some people are dumb enough to buy an iphone and ipod touch.

fiftydollarshoe
Jan 10, 2008, 09:57 AM
The fact that there has not been a great deal of software updates since (minor ones), tells me that something nice is brewing there, and hopefully we should see a very tasty update next week... Fingers crossed anyway.

Agreed rather than seeing a new phone we are more likely to see a new update with loads more features...........

ungraphic
Jan 10, 2008, 10:03 AM
Good one! oh wait. You really mean that you think a treo is in the same league as the iphone? Well I guess you are write. And my old AMC Gremlim was a car just like a BMW 5 series.

Right.

Anyway, yes, the iphone lacks a lot of things, you know.......the things he mentioned? Or are you just delusional?

i see this brought up all the time but seriously editing a spreadsheet would be the last thing i would want to do on a phone/pda.


Correct, editing a spreadsheet or document would be pretty stupid considering the iphone doesnt have tactile keys.

Fail.

nja247
Jan 10, 2008, 10:05 AM
I really don't think the iPhone is that special, I was more productive with my treo and now since I switched to the iPhone I miss my treo. I cannot download email attachments and save locally on the phone. It takes 3 clicks to get to the number pad, so making a phone call can be a bit more tasking than using any other phone. Copy / Paste ? Send a file wirelessly from one iPhone to another? video recording? Ability to edit a word or excel document?

The iPhone still lacks some serious software upgrades to become a productive business phone.

I love my iPhone, but I do wonder sometimes how long it would take me to dial 112 in case on emergency versus a normal phone, or if the screen developed a dead zone. Hopefully this will not occur and I'm just weird, lol.

plumbingandtech
Jan 10, 2008, 10:08 AM
Right.

Anyway, yes, the iphone lacks a lot of things, you know.......the things he mentioned? Or are you just delusional?

Delusional because I can see the difference between a gremlin and a 5 series?

This is not about small features like excel edit(that will get here). This is about a whole new platform that is like a stick of dynamite in the old cell phone industry's hen house. I guess it is fine if some people can not see the feathers flying and instead will whine about little things that will be fixed with software.

Add all the software you want to a palm treo and it will never get to the iphones level of use. Because palm employees do not have the same devotion to quality and ease of use.

That is what sets the iphone apart and "makes it so special", NOT because someone can not take a video of someone falling down drunk and send it as an attachment to all his likeminded friends.

GeekLawyer
Jan 10, 2008, 10:09 AM
Do you have to sell your soul to SJ in order to get an iPhone?

I know I didn't. I just used cash.

network23
Jan 10, 2008, 10:17 AM
It takes 3 clicks to get to the number pad, so making a phone call can be a bit more tasking than using any other phone.

Set up your Home button double-click to send you to Phone Favorites and you are only two clicks away (counting the double-click as one click).

gr8ful
Jan 10, 2008, 10:22 AM
I really don't think the iPhone is that special, I was more productive with my treo and now since I switched to the iPhone I miss my treo. I cannot download email attachments and save locally on the phone. It takes 3 clicks to get to the number pad, so making a phone call can be a bit more tasking than using any other phone. Copy / Paste ? Send a file wirelessly from one iPhone to another? video recording? Ability to edit a word or excel document?

The iPhone still lacks some serious software upgrades to become a productive business phone.

One encouraging thing this article alludes to is that Apple had to really cut out a lot of desired functionality to meet their deadline. Given what we know of Apple, they want their software to be as revolutionary as their hardware. I now expect that we may see one helluva large iPhone software update either at Macworld or soon after that will bring the software side of the iPhone up to par with the industry leading hardware side of the iPhone.

Apple's success has hinged on producing a spectacular user experience through the seamless integration of hardware and software. The iPhone will be no different and before this year is up, the software running on the iPhone will make it the most feature complete and productive smart phone/handheld/internet tablet ever produced.

Don't forget, with the SDK now opening up the iPhone to third-party developers, the software solutions that will be available will increase at least ten-fold. Where today you have no solution, by the end of the year you may have 3 or 4 different application solutions to choose from.

Patience, my young padawans! Rome wasn't built in a day, so it will probably take :apple: at least another year or two to recreate the didital universe.

:)

Cudadown
Jan 10, 2008, 10:25 AM
I can't believe how much money apple gets from these things. $400+$240 per contract?? That's WITHOUT accessories. What was their estimated cost to build, 200? (really stretching the memory on that one, not at all confident).

I'm so frustrated with our cellphone industry in the U.S. Compared to the rest of the world, we're so backwards and are being abused left and right by the carriers. Why can't I buy a phone and THEN pick my carrier based on if my phone is GSM or CDMA? Makes no sense. I think the cellphone marketing strategy should be for a set fee. Ie, you pay $40/month and that includes all data, texts, and as many minutes, within the U.S., as you can use. I don't get all the 'minutes' crap.

You can. You just dont get a contract discount. Your free to buy any damn phone you please just like the all wonderful europe. They dont get discounts either.

ungraphic
Jan 10, 2008, 10:27 AM
Delusional because I can see the difference between a gremlin and a 5 series?

This is not about small features like excel edit(that will get here). This is about a whole new platform that is like a stick of dynamite in the old cell phone industry's hen house. I guess it is fine if some people can not see the feathers flying and instead will whine about little things that will be fixed with software.

Add all the software you want to a palm treo and it will never get to the iphones level of use. Because palm employees do not have the same devotion to quality and ease of use.

That is what sets the iphone apart and "makes it so special", NOT because someone can not take a video of someone falling down drunk and send it as an attachment to all his likeminded friends.

You sound like some tv evangelist using old biblical scriptures as a means of making a point. Nowhere in your incoherent rambling did you say anything remotely close to making a decent, logica or rational thought.

Thank you, for proving my original point of being delusional.

scu
Jan 10, 2008, 10:29 AM
They spent a year working on Tablet PC tech?

Oh really?

This makes me more confident that a tablet-type Mac will be shown at MWSF.

This to me is the biggest news in this article.

aapl is cheap at 176:)

Cudadown
Jan 10, 2008, 10:37 AM
The idea is that the jerkwad phone companies are the ones that set the exorbitant prices (not manufacturers) for their crappy little phones, and then they will pay for the "expensive" handset, as long as you sign your soul to them for two years. Of course, they're not really paying Nokia or LG or anyone the "list price" -- they just made whatever astronomically high number they wanted, so it seems like you're getting a real bargain when you sign up with them. The phones themselves cost practically nothing to produce, with minimal R&D.

So, the trick is this: Nokia makes a $20 phone (that is, it costs $20 to manufacture). AT&T advises Nokia that the phone is worth $100. Nokia sets the price at $100. AT&T will offer to GIVE you the phone, if you sign up with AT&T. AT&T pays Nokia maybe something like $30 for the phone. You think you've saved $100. Your first monthly bill is $80, of which $49 is profit for AT&T, after they paid Nokia. Each subsequent bill is $79 of pure profit.

The difference with iPhone (and the reason that AT&T isn't giving them out if you sign up) is that 1) Apple set the price, not AT&T; 2) Apple actually expects to get $400 for every iPhone they sell (minus whatever percentage for phones sold in AT&T stores); and 3) The iPhone actually is a $400 phone. That is to say, the cost to research, develop, manufacture, and garner a (reasonable) profit makes $400 a sensible price -- no "wiggle room" for AT&T.

So running the network and infrastructure and personnel does not cost at&t anything?

Serious flaw in your theory.

mozmac
Jan 10, 2008, 10:38 AM
The greatest thing about the iPhone. It's pushing the industry to make phones for the users, not the carriers.

Cudadown
Jan 10, 2008, 10:45 AM
I can imagine how much ************ he had to feed them with his 'reality distortian field.' Steve Jobs is the greatest spin doctor to have ever walked the face of the earth. If theres anyone greater at exaggerating a product, please give me a name.

Also, the iphone is hardly revolutionary. Late, is what it is, the only thing its got thats revolutionary is a multi-touch interface, and lack of tactile keys, which makes it a crappy product. Also, aesthetically, it looks like ass, hardly represents the usual 'apple' look. Jonathan Ive must be glad that at least some people are dumb enough to buy an iphone and ipod touch.

He is just pissed he cant get one in canada yet.

Padraig
Jan 10, 2008, 10:45 AM
Good one! oh wait. You really mean that you think a treo is in the same league as the iphone? Well I guess you are write. And my old AMC Gremlim was a car just like a BMW 5 series.

No day on macrumors is complete until someone brings up a flawed car analogy. Truely, it's one of the great Macrumors cliches.

Very interesting article, surprised that development was as cheap as 150 million.

mccldwll
Jan 10, 2008, 10:52 AM
I really don't think the iPhone is that special, I was more productive with my treo and now since I switched to the iPhone I miss my treo. I cannot download email attachments and save locally on the phone. It takes 3 clicks to get to the number pad, so making a phone call can be a bit more tasking than using any other phone. Copy / Paste ? Send a file wirelessly from one iPhone to another? video recording? Ability to edit a word or excel document?

The iPhone still lacks some serious software upgrades to become a productive business phone.

You are exceptional. Several business users I know who switched from the Treo to the iPhone say the Treo feels prehistoric in comparison.

ungraphic
Jan 10, 2008, 10:52 AM
He is just pissed he cant get one in canada yet.

In Canada, a real smartphone is called a BlackBerry.

GeekLawyer
Jan 10, 2008, 10:53 AM
In Canada, a real smartphone is called a BlackBerry.

For the moment, yes....

princigalli
Jan 10, 2008, 10:58 AM
They have the technology bot not the service. My German Iphone was damaged, so I called Apple. They told me to go to T-Mobile, so I went. But they told me they don't know what to do with an Iphone, so they gave me the phone number from Apple and told me to call them. I called Apple once again but they told me they don't service Iphones.

So I think I will throw it out of the window. Hopefully it will land on some Apple employee.

havand
Jan 10, 2008, 11:00 AM
well you can buy your phone then pick your carrier if you want for the GSM phones. Just it is going to cost you quite a bit more money to get the phone because it is not be subsidized by the providers.


Yes and you're handing over lots more money to the carrier because the 'subsidy' for the phone is built into the contract price, which, is why I hate the system. I wish they'd reduce the prices and let me buy my own phone.

Slip
Jan 10, 2008, 11:04 AM
No day on macrumors is complete until someone brings up a flawed car analogy. Truely, it's one of the great Macrumors cliches.

It's what I come here for ...

But back on topic, good read and pretty extraordinary the lengths they went to to keep the thing under wraps.

nxent
Jan 10, 2008, 11:04 AM
steve jobs throwing a tantrum? no....

Unspeaked
Jan 10, 2008, 11:06 AM
No day on macrumors is complete until someone brings up a flawed car analogy. Truely, it's one of the great Macrumors cliches.

That observation is as smooth riding and straight-to-the-point as a Coupe deVille...

:D

shadowfax
Jan 10, 2008, 11:08 AM
I can imagine how much ************ he had to feed them with his 'reality distortian field.' Steve Jobs is the greatest spin doctor to have ever walked the face of the earth. If theres anyone greater at exaggerating a product, please give me a name.

Also, the iphone is hardly revolutionary. Late, is what it is, the only thing its got thats revolutionary is a multi-touch interface, and lack of tactile keys, which makes it a crappy product. Also, aesthetically, it looks like ass, hardly represents the usual 'apple' look. Jonathan Ive must be glad that at least some people are dumb enough to buy an iphone and ipod touch.

I would agree that the iPhone is hardly revolutionary, and that it's late considering that something of its caliber should have been developed by an actual telecom company a long time ago, but for it to come from a company with no prior experience, as this article discusses, is pretty incredible.

Anyway, you talk like a troll, so I don't have much more to say, but I was curious--since everyone else is delusional and "failing," perhaps you could explain to me this. How does the iPhone look like "ass," or deviate from Apple design standards? It is small, made from highly durable materials barring the tragic flaw that if you dropped it from too high/at the wrong angle you're in a bad way--Aluminum and glass. Aluminum has been in macs since 2003. Glass was just put on the iMacs. The curves of the machine are reminiscent of the MacBook Pro, the MacBook, the iMac, and the Mac Pro. It's simple, with an absolute minimum of buttons on its surface, and the user interface flows like butter. How does that deviate from Apple's standards? and again, please explain to me how it looks like "ass?" It sure doesn't look like mine.

I am not trying to say that the phone is perfect. It lacks a number of abilities, including the ability to store, view, and edit arbitrary file types, particularly office documents, although at least it can read those. But I think that it would make more sense to criticize those things rather than go on an irrational tirade about its poor design. If you want to criticize the design, please do, but calling it crap for no reason?

"Fail."

QuarterSwede
Jan 10, 2008, 11:13 AM
That was actually a great article. Generally I can't stand Wired.

shadowfax
Jan 10, 2008, 11:14 AM
They have the technology bot not the service. My German Iphone was damaged, so I called Apple. They told me to go to T-Mobile, so I went. But they told me they don't know what to do with an Iphone, so they gave me the phone number from Apple and told me to call them. I called Apple once again but they told me they don't service Iphones.

So I think I will throw it out of the window. Hopefully it will land on some Apple employee.

You should e-mail Steve Jobs and tell him that Apple Europe's Service sucks, and tell him your story. It's a long shot, but you never know. There have been a number of people that have e-mailed him and gotten a response that seemed personal.

Your story does not click with my experience with my iPhone here in the US. They replaced my phone, no questions asked, even though the tech could not even see the issue I saw with the screen. I was extremely impressed with the service I received.

kasei
Jan 10, 2008, 11:15 AM
Great article. I would love to hear how they kept the teams motivated despite the amount of pressure they were under to deliver.

tys
Jan 10, 2008, 11:17 AM
Actually, the number of patents on bicycle transmissions would make your head spin. People have been working on trying to find an alternative to the chain driven bicycle forever. There are plenty of commuter bikes that now have internal transmission but you won't see any of this on high end bikes. Unfortunately with less than a 1/2 horsepower motor (your legs) all these fancy high tech transmissions suck when compared to the efficiency of a chain and cogs. Sometimes there is a reason why a technology sticks around.

Sorry to continue to stray off topic, but coincidentally this just came up on one of my favorite bike forums (although it's an older article)

http://www.jhu.edu/news_info/news/home99/aug99/bike.html

Personally, I would love to see Apple design a bike!

tys

devilot
Jan 10, 2008, 11:17 AM
Great article. I would love to hear how they kept the teams motivated despite the amount of pressure they were under to deliver.Being employed is probably a decent motivator. :D

killmoms
Jan 10, 2008, 11:18 AM
Being employed is probably a decent motivator. :D

You'd be surprised how often it isn't. ;)

ungraphic
Jan 10, 2008, 11:20 AM
I would agree that the iPhone is hardly revolutionary, and that it's late considering that something of its caliber should have been developed by an actual telecom company a long time ago, but for it to come from a company with no prior experience, as this article discusses, is pretty incredible.

Anyway, you talk like a troll, so I don't have much more to say, but I was curious--since everyone else is delusional and "failing," perhaps you could explain to me this. How does the iPhone look like "ass," or deviate from Apple design standards? It is small, made from highly durable materials barring the tragic flaw that if you dropped it from too high/at the wrong angle you're in a bad way--Aluminum and glass. Aluminum has been in macs since 2003. Glass was just put on the iMacs. The curves of the machine are reminiscent of the MacBook Pro, the MacBook, the iMac, and the Mac Pro. It's simple, with an absolute minimum of buttons on its surface, and the user interface flows like butter. How does that deviate from Apple's standards? and again, please explain to me how it looks like "ass?" It sure doesn't look like mine.

I am not trying to say that the phone is perfect. It lacks a number of abilities, including the ability to store, view, and edit arbitrary file types, particularly office documents, although at least it can read those. But I think that it would make more sense to criticize those things rather than go on an irrational tirade about its poor design. If you want to criticize the design, please do, but calling it crap for no reason?

"Fail."

I could have gone into its non-aesthetic based flaws, but i chose not to seeing how a slew of other people have pointed that out. The point im making is that given THOSE flaws, steve jobs must have said something pretty convincing in order to get his iphone theory up and running. He could sell water to a whale if he had to.

As for its aesthetic, the iphone looks pretty miserable for an apple product (and apple products 98% of the time look pretty chic). If you look at the ipod and its evolution, and then throw the iphone/ipod touch to the mix....its disappointing, but thats besides the point because both products are pretty disappointing for having a lack of tactile.

QuarterSwede
Jan 10, 2008, 11:20 AM
You are exceptional. Several business users I know who switched from the Treo to the iPhone say the Treo feels prehistoric in comparison.That's exactly what my brother-in-law said about his old Treo. He is pro-PC/Windows but loves his iPhone.

gloss
Jan 10, 2008, 11:21 AM
Also, the iphone is hardly revolutionary. Late, is what it is, the only thing its got thats revolutionary is a multi-touch interface, and lack of tactile keys, which makes it a crappy product. Also, aesthetically, it looks like ass, hardly represents the usual 'apple' look. Jonathan Ive must be glad that at least some people are dumb enough to buy an iphone and ipod touch.

Congratulations, your credibility = 0.

Mykolas
Jan 10, 2008, 11:23 AM
Its interesting to see how few people realise that Jobs is actually somewhat special.
Perhaps we think that other cell phone manufacturers could do something like the iPhone, but they really can NOT.

The controlling world is stronger than ever, but Jobs is not caught by it.

They always have excuses for not developing new products that people can really use, but the main reason is FEAR.
Watch Gates and his quivering little-greedy-boy performance at CES in Vegas, then compare with the adult Jobs at MacWorld.
One is a fearful, tight-fisted creature, the other is unafraid and clear-sighted.

Apple's brilliance is about Jobs, and there are precious few like him, sadly for our various societies around the globe.

I wish Apple would design a car, a house, a system for growing vegetables in urban settings, a bicycle, etc. etc.

With such clear vision, they could improve almost anything.

Consider the cell phone and how long you put up with crap. Apple stopped that with iPhone.

There are lots of things like that - look at the bicycle chain and gear system - its amazingly crappy, and over 150 years old, but there is no impetus to change it.

Look at hybrid cars - they are supposed to be so great, but they are dull and not as gas efficient as they should/could be.

Its fear and greed that dominate our world, and Apple and Jobs do their bit to defeat it with their human-centered products.

Jeah! And I would also love to see Apple as a music record company, so all good bands could show middle finger to sony, universal, emi, o whatever they are and be happy with Apple ! :) And then Apple could sell good quality and all drm free music thru iTMS! :) Live long Apple!

+ I love soooo much to read articles of inside Apple or SJ thoughts...

QuarterSwede
Jan 10, 2008, 11:24 AM
...The point im making is that given THOSE flaws, steve jobs must have said something pretty convincing in order to get his iphone theory up and running. He could sell water to a whale if he had to.All Jobs had to do was say, "look what I did to the mobile media player business."

As for its aesthetic, the iphone looks pretty miserable for an apple product (and apple products 98% of the time look pretty chic). If you look at the ipod and its evolution, and then throw the iphone/ipod touch to the mix....its disappointing...
As for aesthetics, your opinion is that it looks very un-Apple like. When I first saw it I thought, only Apple could have come up with that beauty.

Rocketman
Jan 10, 2008, 11:34 AM
As for aesthetics, your opinion is that it looks very un-Apple like.

Opinions are like "orifices".

Rocketman

:p

JGowan
Jan 10, 2008, 11:36 AM
5 year exclusivity for AT&T?? :confused: That will keep me from buying the iPhone for a while. :(Newbie… you ARE new. What rock have you been hiding under this past year?

SthrnCmfrtr
Jan 10, 2008, 11:37 AM
As for aesthetics, your opinion is that it looks very un-Apple like. When I first saw it I thought, only Apple could have come up with that beauty.

Pretty much what I thought.

I'm always amused and mildly irritated by posts that pick on the aesthetic value of something I find beautiful. There seems to be an unspoken contest on MacRumors between people who are vying to prove that they have the best taste of anyone, and so they attack the things that damn near everyone else finds to be remarkably elegant and beautiful. "The iPhone looks like ass!" "The new iMac looks like ass, with that damn chin! WTF?" "720p looks like ass!" etc.

Even more amusing than the contempt is the histrionics we occasionally see: "I think I just threw up in my mouth a little bit looking at the iPod nano." "I am on the verge of tears over the new ACDs." "I am considering suicide as a viable alternative to working with this 3-D dock," etc.

Apple creates some of the most beautiful designs known to man -- my evidence for that claim is the massive number of people who write articles and blog posts and forum posts about how stunning the new designs are. If you are truly revolted by Apple's design, I suggest you take a thoughtful look around at the world in which we live and ****. If Apple's industrial design really upsets you more than, say, Buddhist monks getting slaughtered wholesale in Burma, all I can say is that my mom has an ashtray I made in Kindergarten that I'd like to beat you over the head with.

killmoms
Jan 10, 2008, 11:38 AM
...but thats besides the point because both products are pretty disappointing for having a lack of tactile.

Why? It is their utter lack of fixed, inflexible interfaces that make them both so powerful and expandable. What other phone can claim a software update completely changes the interface? Want to add a button? Sorry, you can't, you've got a big keypad.

I don't get the big thing about tactile input anyway. I'm more than happy to sacrifice the "feel of clicky buttons" if it nets me a more fluid, intelligent user experience. That's exactly what the iPhone offers.

Can it be improved? Most certainly. There are some missing features and tweaks that could be done to the interface—but that's exactly the point. The reason these interface issues are addressable is because there are a minimum of fixed buttons on the phone.

shadowfax
Jan 10, 2008, 11:48 AM
As for aesthetics, your opinion is that it looks very un-Apple like. When I first saw it I thought, only Apple could have come up with that beauty.

Yes, it is his opinion, but No--he is wrong. That is the thing about opinions--Some opinions are about something that can't fully be substantiated, like "this is ugly." However, "this looks like x made it" is an opinion that can most assuredly be evaluated as wrong or right. The iPhone is a hallmark Apple design, whether or not you like it, for all the reasons I previously enumerated and more.

The guy has a few points, but when it comes to design, he neither knows what he's talking about nor is willing to discuss it in a rational matter, resorting to things like "it's already been discussed" and various foundation-less assertions.

"Fail."

Edit:

Apple creates some of the most beautiful designs known to man -- my evidence for that claim is the massive number of people who write articles and blog posts and forum posts about how stunning the new designs are. If you are truly revolted by Apple's design, I suggest you take a thoughtful look around at the world in which we live and ****. If Apple's industrial design really upsets you more than, say, Buddhist monks getting slaughtered wholesale in Burma, all I can say is that my mom has an ashtray I made in Kindergarten that I'd like to beat you over the head with.

That is one of the best things I have read in the last month! Thanks for the good laugh, man.

Project
Jan 10, 2008, 11:50 AM
You have to look at it both ways.

As a media device, do I want a nice big screen and an adaptable, context sensitive UI. Or do I want a fixed UI and a small screen for the sake of having tactile keys?

Its a complete no brainer. Touch screen every single time.

QuarterSwede
Jan 10, 2008, 11:57 AM
Pretty much what I thought.

I'm always amused and mildly irritated by posts that pick on the aesthetic value of something I find beautiful. There seems to be an unspoken contest on MacRumors between people who are vying to prove that they have the best taste of anyone, and so they attack the things that damn near everyone else finds to be remarkably elegant and beautiful. "The iPhone looks like ass!" "The new iMac looks like ass, with that damn chin! WTF?" "720p looks like ass!" etc.

snipped for length
Well said.

ricosuave
Jan 10, 2008, 11:58 AM
In Canada, a real smartphone is called a BlackBerry.

Then why do you care so much about the iPhone to write so many posts=?

shadowfax
Jan 10, 2008, 11:58 AM
You have to look at it both ways.

As a media device, do I want a nice big screen and an adaptable, context sensitive UI. Or do I want a fixed UI and a small screen for the sake of having tactile keys?

Its a complete no brainer. Touch screen every single time.

The only truly legitimate exception I have read to that is the whole car thing. It's kind of frustrating to use the iPhone when you really shouldn't be looking at the screen for more than the occasional glance. the iPod is fairly easy to queue up a song in a car safely. the iPhone is a much more frustrating experience.

But, when you can look at the screen while operating it, it's a real winner. It beats the crap out of any design with a full qwerty keyboard--In that case, the darn things STILL require your full attention to type into, unless you have memorized all the button positions for a grid of over 100 keys placed in less than 4 square inches. Tactile feedback doesn't augment the experience very much when you are LOOKING at your fingers to begin with. now, a multitouch surface in front of a computer terminal would be awful if you were a touch typist. but a phone? your hand is in the same place as the screen. You know what you're touching, whether your finger is on a textured button or not.

Random Ping
Jan 10, 2008, 12:03 PM
Apple is really giving you a big Steve Screwjob, since it only cost 200$ to make the handset that they sell for 400$

This is one of the reasons the handset cost so much - R&D.

YES! Not only does Apple need to recover the costs of developing the product, it needs to recover costs for all the products that they tried to develop but never made it into a commercial product. I have to wonder about all the products that we will probably never know about. That is the nature of a company that lives and dies on innovation.

EagerDragon
Jan 10, 2008, 12:03 PM
Jobs had reason to be confident, according to Wired, as Apple's hardware engineers had spent about a year working on touchscreen technology for a tablet PC and had convinced him that they could build a similar interface for a phone.

It sounds like that tablet does exist and that it uses multitouch interface.

The question is when is it coming out???????????

QuarterSwede
Jan 10, 2008, 12:06 PM
YES! Not only does Apple need to recover the costs of developing the product, it needs to recover costs for all the products that they tried to develop but never made it into a commercial product. I have to wonder about all the products that we will probably never know about. That is the nature of a company that lives and dies on innovation.
Does he even realize the mark up on furniture!? or cabinetry? Furniture is roughly 150% and cabinetry is an unbelievable 400%!!! Electronics have the lowest mark up of anything you can buy because it already costs the manufacturer a good deal to make.

Jobs had reason to be confident, according to Wired, as Apple's hardware engineers had spent about a year working on touchscreen technology for a tablet PC and had convinced him that they could build a similar interface for a phone.

It sounds like that tablet does exist and that it uses multitouch interface.

The question is when is it coming out???????????
We basically already knew that. Look at the patents they put in for it. That doesn't mean they'll come out with one at this year's MWSF. Sometime in the future, most likely though.

The only truly legitimate exception I have read to that is the whole car thing. It's kind of frustrating to use the iPhone when you really shouldn't be looking at the screen for more than the occasional glance. the iPod is fairly easy to queue up a song in a car safely. the iPhone is a much more frustrating experience.
Even that's not a problem with a good head unit and dock connector. Let the remote do all the song changes. I love my Pioneer P4900iB (http://www.crutchfield.com/S-SJ508LKjQko/App/Product/Item/Main.aspx?I=130dehp490&search=pioneer+4900ib).

pdjudd
Jan 10, 2008, 12:12 PM
Jobs had reason to be confident, according to Wired, as Apple's hardware engineers had spent about a year working on touchscreen technology for a tablet PC and had convinced him that they could build a similar interface for a phone.

It sounds like that tablet does exist and that it uses multitouch interface.

The question is when is it coming out???????????
Who knows. For all we know, it was something that Jobs considered, but decided that Multi Touch was better for a phone than a Tablet would be and axed the tablet. Until Apple makes specific intentions to take the business in a specific direction, we cannot say that an internal project is any indication than something that will ever make it to market.

Brianstorm91
Jan 10, 2008, 12:13 PM
Interesting read, especially about how Jobs didn't even care who the provider was and squeezed them for such a good deal.

Does he even realize the mark up on furniture!? or cabinetry? Furniture is roughly 150% and cabinetry is an unbelievable 400%!!!

I'd rather Apple stuck to electronics, regardless of how nice their furniture might be..
;)

jmadlena
Jan 10, 2008, 12:13 PM
...
Watch Gates and his quivering little-greedy-boy performance at CES in Vegas, then compare with the adult Jobs at MacWorld.
One is a fearful, tight-fisted creature, the other is unafraid and clear-sighted.
...

I don't know if you have heard of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (http://www.gatesfoundation.org/) (actually, it is clear you have not). I am a fan of Jobs like any other self-respecting Apple-fan, but don't go putting down someone else to raise Steve up a notch (he stands well enough in his own right). Bill Gates (and Melinda, for that matter) are two of the most generous people I have ever heard of. Their organization is involved in countless regions of the world developing infrastructure, researching life-saving medicines, and doing many other projects. I suggest that you read up on the organization.

Hating Microsoft is no reason to bash Bill Gates. He has obviously done very well for the company and investors as well.

QuarterSwede
Jan 10, 2008, 12:17 PM
I don't know if you have heard of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (http://www.gatesfoundation.org/) (actually, it is clear you have not). I am a fan of Jobs like any other self-respecting Apple-fan, but don't go putting down someone else to raise Steve up a notch (he stands well enough in his own right). Bill Gates (and Melinda, for that matter) are two of the most generous people I have ever heard of. Their organization is involved in countless regions of the world developing infrastructure, researching life-saving medicines, and doing many other projects. I suggest that you read up on the organization.

Hating Microsoft is no reason to bash Bill Gates. He has obviously done very well for the company and investors as well.
I agree. I may not like most of Microsoft's products but Mr. & Mrs. Gates are very generous and heartfelt people.

JGowan
Jan 10, 2008, 12:31 PM
I… but I worry that it is setting a dangerous precedent for the UK phone market - let's make an attractive "must have" handset and see how much we can fleece people who are keen to get one.You're worrying over nothing. The iPhone requires a computer and there is no way around that. The cell industry will always provide a low-cost or no-cost alternative for those people without a computer or who just wants a phone that makes calls.

If you're afraid that the only phones that will be available will be awesome phones that do lots of things very well (like the iPhone) then you're just standing in the proverbial way of progress.

"Fleece" -- love that word, too. As this article clearly shows, Apple went over huge obstacles and braved through corporate bullshiz a mile high so that the iPhone would be a reality. True, $599 and $499 was not "cheap", but they weren't just offering people a phone. This thing does many things extremely well. I think you're forgetting it's "a phone, an ipod and a web communicator" to quote Steve Jobs. You buy a great phone or even a moderate one these days and you'll spend $300 without a contract. Then you buy an iPod (and who doesn't) and you've spent another $250-300 -- the iPhone puts all that technology into a SINGLE device. Somebody had to pay for $150M R&D and Marketing. The early adopters.

Also, after just a few months, Apple dropped the price to $399 for an 8GB model for those holiday shoppers, gave early adopters a $100 credit and we'll soon hear the numbers. Some people BOO-HOO'd and BAWLED, but Early Adopters, we always pay more. But we got the joy of being the only folks in the office with such a slick new device -- later we rewarded with $100 worth of Apple stuff.

They could've kept the price at $500-600 and still sold them all out, but they didn't. Any other company IN THE WORLD would've, but they dropped it by $200 and I think that says a lot about the company…

It certainly doesn't say "FLEECE".

EagerDragon
Jan 10, 2008, 12:38 PM
I don't know if you have heard of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (http://www.gatesfoundation.org/) (actually, it is clear you have not). I am a fan of Jobs like any other self-respecting Apple-fan, but don't go putting down someone else to raise Steve up a notch (he stands well enough in his own right). Bill Gates (and Melinda, for that matter) are two of the most generous people I have ever heard of. Their organization is involved in countless regions of the world developing infrastructure, researching life-saving medicines, and doing many other projects. I suggest that you read up on the organization.

Hating Microsoft is no reason to bash Bill Gates. He has obviously done very well for the company and investors as well.

While I agree that the foundation is doing a lot of good things, I am not sure what that has to do with the previous comment (by someone else) about the way Bill comes across to a lot of people. Bill does not have much of a presense, however I would like to get in his will.

princigalli
Jan 10, 2008, 12:40 PM
You should e-mail Steve Jobs and tell him that Apple Europe's Service sucks, and tell him your story. It's a long shot, but you never know. There have been a number of people that have e-mailed him and gotten a response that seemed personal.

Your story does not click with my experience with my iPhone here in the US. They replaced my phone, no questions asked, even though the tech could not even see the issue I saw with the screen. I was extremely impressed with the service I received.

I'm glad to know that Apple US has better service. Unfortunately here in Germany there is no customer culture. We are expected to pay, get a kick behind and even thank them for it. Worse than all, T-Mobile Germany is very bad even for local standards. Almost evil.

killmoms
Jan 10, 2008, 12:42 PM
They could've kept the price at $500-600 and still sold them all out, but they didn't. Any other company IN THE WORLD would've, but they dropped it by $200 and I think that says a lot about the company…

It certainly doesn't say "FLEECE".

He's not talking about Apple—he's talking about their deal with O2 in the UK, where the plans available if you want an iPhone really are pretty lousy.

dante@sisna.com
Jan 10, 2008, 12:57 PM
I really don't think the iPhone is that special, I was more productive with my treo and now since I switched to the iPhone I miss my treo. I cannot download email attachments and save locally on the phone. It takes 3 clicks to get to the number pad, so making a phone call can be a bit more tasking than using any other phone. Copy / Paste ? Send a file wirelessly from one iPhone to another? video recording? Ability to edit a word or excel document?

The iPhone still lacks some serious software upgrades to become a productive business phone.

My experience is the exact opposite.

I don't miss my Treo or my Blackberry.

I am far more productive on the iPhone - consistently productive

Buran
Jan 10, 2008, 12:59 PM
Heaven forbid the paying customers get what they want instead of what some faceless suit, whose phone bill is company-paid, gets what he wants.

Paying customers come first. It's nice to see the customer finally getting their wants put first, which is only fair as the paying customers keep the companies in business. It's a shame that it took someone to basically force them to play ball, but sometimes a little slapping is what it takes.

View
Jan 10, 2008, 01:12 PM
More expensive than Vertu (http://vertu.com/en/?)

I was thinking the same exact thing.
I was also thinking about Steve Ballmer in the interview saying it was the most expensive phone in the world. I didn't think it was wise for him to be in an interview in the first place.

tgildred
Jan 10, 2008, 01:12 PM
In Canada, a real smartphone is called a BlackBerry.


In Canada, phone drives you!

JGowan
Jan 10, 2008, 01:18 PM
I really don't think the iPhone is that special, I was more productive with my treo and now since I switched to the iPhone I miss my treo. I cannot download email attachments and save locally on the phone. It takes 3 clicks to get to the number pad, so making a phone call can be a bit more tasking than using any other phone. Copy / Paste ? Send a file wirelessly from one iPhone to another? video recording? Ability to edit a word or excel document?

The iPhone still lacks some serious software upgrades to become a productive business phone.I don't know about you and what you knew, but 99% of what the iPhone could/couldn't do was known before they were available. It was announced 6 months in advance, remember? Why did you buy an iPhone if it lacked so many things you needed in a phone? Seems like if you Treo was doing a great job, you would've stayed with it.

Also -- "copy/paste, BT file transfers, video recording, editing" -- those are all software issues that more than likely will all be addressed this year. As far as taking 3 clicks to the number pad -- you omit to state that while that might a slight inconvenience, how much easier navigating around the multi-touch screen is, not to mention how cool. Honestly, there's no cover on the phone so it has to be locked. I used to a "*-2" (I think) to unlock my phone so that was two button pushes to be able to dial… so you're honestly complaining about ONE EXTRA tap?

Sounds like you should sell your iPhone and go back to the Treo.

neoserver
Jan 10, 2008, 01:19 PM
In Canada, a real smartphone is called a BlackBerry.

In Canada, you also pay $25 per month for just the 4MB data add on with Rogers... *sigh*

OllyW
Jan 10, 2008, 01:22 PM
You're worrying over nothing. The iPhone requires a computer and there is no way around that. The cell industry will always provide a low-cost or no-cost alternative for those people without a computer or who just wants a phone that makes calls.

If you're afraid that the only phones that will be available will be awesome phones that do lots of things very well (like the iPhone) then you're just standing in the proverbial way of progress.

"Fleece" -- love that word, too. As this article clearly shows, Apple went over huge obstacles and braved through corporate bullshiz a mile high so that the iPhone would be a reality. True, $599 and $499 was not "cheap", but they weren't just offering people a phone. This thing does many things extremely well. I think you're forgetting it's "a phone, an ipod and a web communicator" to quote Steve Jobs. You buy a great phone or even a moderate one these days and you'll spend $300 without a contract. Then you buy an iPod (and who doesn't) and you've spent another $250-300 -- the iPhone puts all that technology into a SINGLE device. Somebody had to pay for $150M R&D and Marketing. The early adopters.

Also, after just a few months, Apple dropped the price to $399 for an 8GB model for those holiday shoppers, gave early adopters a $100 credit and we'll soon hear the numbers. Some people BOO-HOO'd and BAWLED, but Early Adopters, we always pay more. But we got the joy of being the only folks in the office with such a slick new device -- later we rewarded with $100 worth of Apple stuff.

They could've kept the price at $500-600 and still sold them all out, but they didn't. Any other company IN THE WORLD would've, but they dropped it by $200 and I think that says a lot about the company…

It certainly doesn't say "FLEECE".


The iPhone and it's phone plans are not badly priced in the USA, you seem to be paying only $20 per month more than standard AT&T plans for the addition of the unlimited data plan.

Here in the UK, O2 are not giving such good value for money. Here's something I posted in another thread showing how much extra O2 are charging us.


You are not making money off the providers, it is the iPhone customers who are paying the extra.

The O2 tariffs are around £8.50 a month more expensive than they should be.

If you don't believe me, here are some comparisons.

iPhone £35 per month with 200 minutes / 200 txts / data & Cloud Wi-Fi

O2 SIM only £15 per month with 200 minutes / 400 txts / data add on £7.50 / Cloud W-Fi £3.99 = £26.49



iPhone £45 per month with 600 minutes / 500 txts / data & Cloud Wi-Fi

O2 SIM only £25 per month with 600 minutes / 1000 txts / data add on £7.50 / Cloud W-Fi £3.99 = £36.49



iPhone £55 per month with 1200 minutes / 500 txts / data & Cloud Wi-Fi

O2 SIM only £25 per month with 1200 minutes / 1000 txts / data add on £7.50 / Cloud W-Fi £3.99 = £36.49

For reference, the £3.99 Cloud is for the iPod touch package.

Each tariff is £8.51 extra with only half the included text messages.

Slip
Jan 10, 2008, 01:33 PM
Bill does not have much of a presense, however I would like to get in his will.

Yeah, he can't quite seem to be the 'cool' geek, just the plain old nerd...
And if you do get in the will, teach me how ;)

pubius
Jan 10, 2008, 01:56 PM
seriously complaining about 100% markup?
that's nothing these days.
look at everything else around you...
gas, clothing, jewelry, cars, bottled water, cd's.
those are all at least 300% to over 1000% markup.
i'd say the consumer came out pretty well on this one.

Project
Jan 10, 2008, 01:56 PM
The iPhone and it's phone plans are not badly priced in the USA, you seem to be paying only $20 per month more than standard AT&T plans for the addition of the unlimited data plan.

Here in the UK, O2 are not giving such good value for money. Here's something I posted in another thread showing how much extra O2 are charging us.

A couple of points.

1. I think we can agree that O2 invested money in the EDGE rollout and Visual Voicemail implementation primarily for the iPhone. Money which can justifiably be recouped elsewhere by the company. I'm not even going to go into the £20m marketing budget O2 has laid out for the iPhone.

2. The Cloud for an individual device like a PSP or any other phone is actually £6.99. The £3.99 is a special deal only for the Touch, negotiated by Apple/O2.

So even adjusting for the Cloud alone, and not including the EDGE/VV stuff, that makes the iPhone £5.50 per month more expensive than the closest equivalent tariff.

So to sum up, while there is a premium in the iPhone contracts and less flexibility, the doom merchants on this forum and elsewhere moaning about how "you have to sign up to the most horrible contract in the entire industry", are grossly exaggerating. Especially when it still costs £8 for 30MB of data on Orange.

Passante
Jan 10, 2008, 02:44 PM
5 year exclusivity for AT&T?? :confused: That will keep me from buying the iPhone for a while. :(

That is your loss :D I'm enjoying mine.

iJohn
Jan 10, 2008, 03:26 PM
There are lots of things like that - look at the bicycle chain and gear system - its amazingly crappy, and over 150 years old, but there is no impetus to change it.




I agree with your main points but I think you're wrong about the bike chain and gear system. They've been using chain for so long because its the most efficient way to transfer power. There have been all sorts of crazy drive systems for bikes but the trade offs haven't been worth it. Too heavy, not efficient enough, not durable enough, not easy to manufacture, yadah, yadah. The main goal for a bike drive system is to be light and efficient. If you push down on the peddles and 10% of the energy is lost, you have to work that much harder.

I do wish apple made a bike though :):) I wish apple made everything...

FoxyKaye
Jan 10, 2008, 03:26 PM
The high stress, pressure cooker, development to a deadline, engineer burn-out genesis of the iPhone sounds very much like the story of the development of the original Macintosh, albeit on a much bigger scale.
It also illustrates what a terrible manager Steve really is. Innovator, for sure, but it seems like Apple could get more done if its employees didn't wind up hating each other after every major project.

Though I thought the article was spot-on about wrenching the cell phone industry's death-grip on innovation away from carriers. Maybe a by-product of all this is that we'll finally see a Treo with WiFi.

I'm warming up to the iPhone a great deal, with the clincher being the upcoming SDK in February. If the next revision incorporates the changes that many folks hope it will, I'll probably be dumping Verizon sometime this year - despite Consumer Reports less-than-glowing review of AT&T.

I'd love to see Apple's "graveyard" of prototypes some day though - everything from the G5 PowerBook through the P1 iPhone, and all the weird circuit boards in wooden boxes in between.

GQB
Jan 10, 2008, 03:27 PM
I guess I can cut them a little slack now about the underwhelming iPhone updates so far. I had no idea how much work all of it really truly is. I'm sure now that they have it more solid they will be adding the features etc. And who knows what they are going crazy working on for 5 years down the road now :) I love Apple :D

The slack I want to see cut is from the geniuses who've been raving for the past 6 months about how 'Apple could have released the SDK right away... they just wanted to screw everyone.'
Yeah... they had plenty of cycles to spare for that.
But those comments were generally from self-aggrandizing hackers who've never worked on a project larger than a Sudoku game.

GQB
Jan 10, 2008, 03:32 PM
Its interesting to see how few people realise that Jobs is actually somewhat special.

Well, there are a lot of Jobs haters out there who would still use the word 'special'. :)
But indeed, I'm remembering the cell phone exec who said something to the effect that Apple was just crazy if they thought they could just waltz in and improve on what the cell phone companies had been doing for 20 years.

GQB
Jan 10, 2008, 03:52 PM
Despite Jobs's reasons for not building one?

Well, I hope you're right.



I'm curious... beyond his reasons for killing the Newton in particular, what have you heard Jobs say dissing tablets in general. Just curious.

GQB
Jan 10, 2008, 03:57 PM
I really don't think the iPhone is that special, I was more productive with my treo and now since I switched to the iPhone I miss my treo. I cannot download email attachments and save locally on the phone. It takes 3 clicks to get to the number pad, so making a phone call can be a bit more tasking than using any other phone. Copy / Paste ? Send a file wirelessly from one iPhone to another? video recording? Ability to edit a word or excel document?

The iPhone still lacks some serious software upgrades to become a productive business phone.

The difference is, however, that the Treo will essentially always be the same device next week as it was when you bought it. Even first gen iPhones will be evolving far past what they originally were since they're software based.
That's the HUGE difference. Every issue you mentioned can or will be remedied within this year.

GQB
Jan 10, 2008, 04:17 PM
You sound like some tv evangelist using old biblical scriptures as a means of making a point. Nowhere in your incoherent rambling did you say anything remotely close to making a decent, logica or rational thought.

Thank you, for proving my original point of being delusional.

Well, how 'bout this?
I haven't gotten an iPhone because my company uses pooled minutes which can't be linked to the iPhone yet. (Do have, and love, the touch, btw.)

So until then, I when my Nokia died recently, I got a kRAZR. Looked good on paper. 2 meg camera and all the other iPhone'ish features that 'everyone else already has.'

1) activating took 1/2 hour on phone with the carrier
2) the interface is the most god-awful mish-mash of hidden menus and 'hotkeys' I've ever seen.
3) and now the fun part. I simply wanted to sync my Mac address book with the phone. I had already sync'd my PC Outlook (contacts and calendar) to my touch, and sync'd from there to my Mac in about (literally) 5 minutes via iTunes. No hassles, no data issues at all.
After connecting the kRAZR to my Mac via Bluetooth (not particularly worse or better than other pairing exercises I've had) I wasted over an hour trying to get the address book to sync. Ultimately gave up, and have since heard that that's a common issue. (Anyone have a solution to that one?)
4) I tried out the handy-dandy camera and after taking a few picture, discovered that there's no way (apparently) to DELETE A ******** PICTURE!!
At least no way that's in any way intuitive to anyone I've handed it to. (Again, anyone have a fix to that one?)
5) the 'web' access is a pathetic joke.
the point is, again, the 'revolutionary' aspect is not any specific feature (other than visual voice-mail.) Its that all of those features that every other phone claims to have are actually USABLE on on the iPhone.
And the fact that its ultimate expandability is light years beyond any other phone.

THAT's what's leaving everyone else in the dust.

shiunn
Jan 10, 2008, 04:46 PM
i remember back in those days, I was secretly happy when ROKR didn't make it. I really didn't like the iPod nor Apple then. Now I find myself secretly cheering Apple on!
I wonder what changed...

hrmpf
Jan 10, 2008, 05:28 PM
There seems to be quite a bit of support for the concept of the P1 in the patent applications filed by Apple (http://hrmpf.com/wordpress/233/apples-first-iphone-the-p1)

http://hrmpf.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/iphonenano.jpg

Steve P. Jobs is the lead inventor on all the applications too... he doesn't appear on the actual iPhone patent applications :rolleyes:

megfilmworks
Jan 10, 2008, 05:51 PM
You sound like some tv evangelist using old biblical scriptures as a means of making a point. Nowhere in your incoherent rambling did you say anything remotely close to making a decent, logica or rational thought.

Thank you, for proving my original point of being delusional.

I hope you don't give people financial advice because you are obviously clueless.
But I doubt your serious. If you are I am worried for your common sense.

cofdog
Jan 10, 2008, 07:16 PM
Also, aesthetically, it looks like ass, hardly represents the usual 'apple' look.

I wholeheartedly agree. It is gorgeous. No wonder everyone is dying to get their hands on an iPhone.

CalfCanuck
Jan 10, 2008, 07:37 PM
So until then, I when my Nokia died recently, I got a kRAZR. Looked good on paper. 2 meg camera and all the other iPhone'ish features that 'everyone else already has.'
... After connecting the kRAZR to my Mac via Bluetooth (not particularly worse or better than other pairing exercises I've had) I wasted over an hour trying to get the address book to sync. Ultimately gave up, and have since heard that that's a common issue. (Anyone have a solution to that one?)
GQB,

I also got a recent kRAZR, and confirm that mine is also a POS! I talk for 40 minutes, and the phone is dead - never had a phone die this quickly.

As to synching with my Mac, I also wasted an hour with sorts of nonsense 2 weeks ago. But finally got it to work for contacts - I think this was the solution I found:

1. Delete any previous Device profiles for it you may have created in iSync.
2. Go to the Settings/Bluetooth Menu and delete any Device profiles you previously created on kRAZR.
3. Now Under the Settings/Bluetooth/Settings options, set t eh Discover Mode to On, but DON'T use the phone to look for the computer.
4. With the phone in discovery mode, open iSync and Add Device.

When I did things in this order, iSync could not only see the device (which it could earlier), but could upload my contacts. I don't believe it has support for iCal, however.

SheriffParker
Jan 10, 2008, 07:56 PM
5 year exclusivity for AT&T?? :confused: That will keep me from buying the iPhone for a while. :(

This post seems like its 11.5 months old.

megfilmworks
Jan 10, 2008, 08:50 PM
In Canada, a real smartphone is called a BlackBerry.
Please don't start insulting Canadians now.

MacRonin
Jan 10, 2008, 09:29 PM
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2013/2184644728_7b9a770c0d_o.jpg

MikeTheC
Jan 10, 2008, 11:10 PM
How does the iPhone look like "ass," or deviate from Apple design standards?

I think ungraphic meant to say that his iPhone looks like ass. Fortunately, MacRumors' secret cameras were on hand to capture a photo of ungraphic's iPhone.

And, at long last, the truth can be told.

[drum roll, please...]


http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/7910/ungraphicsiphone01qw2.png

OMG, it's true. Ungraphic's iPhone really does look like ass.

*pokes the nearest Canadian MacRumors member*

"Psst... D'ya think you could ask him to change the picture? Thanks."

MikeTheC
Jan 10, 2008, 11:36 PM
Great article. I would love to hear how they kept the teams motivated despite the amount of pressure they were under to deliver.

Once again, secret spy cameras from MacRumors captured one of several motivational talks Steve gave to the troops during the iPhone's super-secret development phase.

http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/8281/stevejobsmotivation01tz9.png

MikeTheC
Jan 10, 2008, 11:49 PM
Hating Microsoft is no reason to bash Bill Gates. He has obviously done very well for the company and investors as well.

As I view it, it's all blood money anyhow. Bill basically bought himself the world, and now he's trying to make up for it by... what, exactly?

Sorry, I don't trust the man nor respect him, and no amount of him throwing his money around is ever going to change that, no matter how much incidental good it may ever do.

Microsoft is what it has become because of Bill's tireless efforts. Microsoft is Bill Gates.

jmadlena
Jan 11, 2008, 01:52 AM
As I view it, it's all blood money anyhow. Bill basically bought himself the world, and now he's trying to make up for it by... what, exactly?

I think calling Bill Gates' profits gained via Microsoft as 'blood money' is putting it very strongly. Way too strongly, in fact. If you sincerely consider it blood money you have a very warped definition of the term. You sound as if you take computers far too seriously.

Sorry, I don't trust the man nor respect him, and no amount of him throwing his money around is ever going to change that, no matter how much incidental good it may ever do.

That's the thing, it isn't 'incidental good.' It is a determined, planned, and carefully considered effort to do good in the world. Honestly, I think if he had managed Microsoft (Windows development especially) half as well as he does the Gates' Foundation people wouldn't feel the need to hate Microsoft as passionately as they do.

But calling it incidental goodness shows how little you understand the problems of this world and his efforts at alleviating some of those problems.
I think that the children of the world who have clean water, or a school to go to, or a parent that is still alive because of some of the 'blood money' Bill Gates has invested care very little about Microsoft and its inferior OS.

Don't think I'm trying to canonize Bill, but in my mind Bill Gates' philanthropic work around the world will outweigh Steve Jobs' innovative products. They're not even close.

PS If you would like me to go into detail about exactly what the Gates' Foundation does I would be happy to. But I would also point you to their website to read up about it or yourself before you judge Bill Gates to harshly.

http://www.gatesfoundation.org

zephead
Jan 11, 2008, 02:08 AM
I think calling Bill Gates' profits gained via Microsoft as 'blood money' is putting it very strongly. Way too strongly, in fact. If you sincerely consider it blood money you have a very warped definition of the term. You sound as if you take computers far too seriously.

See, that's the thing. It's really great that Bill is using that money to do good. But he wouldn't have that money if it weren't for the way he ran Microsoft. And I wouldn't necessarily call it 'blood money', just money he got from getting rid of his competition. ;)

jmadlena
Jan 11, 2008, 02:20 AM
See, that's the thing. It's really great that Bill is using that money to do good. But he wouldn't have that money if it weren't for the way he ran Microsoft. And I wouldn't necessarily call it 'blood money', just money he got from getting rid of his competition. ;)

Very true. He has the means to fund his philanthropy because of the success of Microsoft. But I don't really see anything terrible about being successful. Nowadays, especially in Europe, companies are punished if they do too well. I understand the desired end - to ensure that consumers get a fair deal - but I don't agree with the means in those cases.

I don't see anything 'sinful' about the way Bill ran Microsoft, so I would not consider it 'blood money,' either.

sunfast
Jan 11, 2008, 05:38 AM
You're worrying over nothing. The iPhone requires a computer and there is no way around that. The cell industry will always provide a low-cost or no-cost alternative for those people without a computer or who just wants a phone that makes calls.

If you're afraid that the only phones that will be available will be awesome phones that do lots of things very well (like the iPhone) then you're just standing in the proverbial way of progress.

"Fleece" -- love that word, too. As this article clearly shows, Apple went over huge obstacles and braved through corporate bullshiz a mile high so that the iPhone would be a reality. True, $599 and $499 was not "cheap", but they weren't just offering people a phone. This thing does many things extremely well. I think you're forgetting it's "a phone, an ipod and a web communicator" to quote Steve Jobs. You buy a great phone or even a moderate one these days and you'll spend $300 without a contract. Then you buy an iPod (and who doesn't) and you've spent another $250-300 -- the iPhone puts all that technology into a SINGLE device. Somebody had to pay for $150M R&D and Marketing. The early adopters.

Also, after just a few months, Apple dropped the price to $399 for an 8GB model for those holiday shoppers, gave early adopters a $100 credit and we'll soon hear the numbers. Some people BOO-HOO'd and BAWLED, but Early Adopters, we always pay more. But we got the joy of being the only folks in the office with such a slick new device -- later we rewarded with $100 worth of Apple stuff.

They could've kept the price at $500-600 and still sold them all out, but they didn't. Any other company IN THE WORLD would've, but they dropped it by $200 and I think that says a lot about the company…

It certainly doesn't say "FLEECE".

I'm still concerned about the potential shake up. For example, the N95. I'd rather have an iPhone clearly but the N95 is still a competent piece of kit -
certainly not a "low-cost or no-cost alternative for those people without a computer or who just wants a phone that makes calls" but with many other features.

I could walk into any phone shop and get one for free on a more competative tariff. I'm not trying to bash the iPhone - I've already made it prettty clear I'd like one. What I don't want is for all future desirable phones to follow the iPhone model.

I don't understand the US phone market but it strikes me that the iPhone is a more attractive package over there.

mccldwll
Jan 11, 2008, 06:22 AM
In Canada, a real smartphone is called a BlackBerry.

In the U.S., we used to call the Blackberry a "smartphone". Now that we have the iPhone in the U.S., we call the Blackberry a "not-very-smartphone".

MikeTheC
Jan 11, 2008, 10:32 AM
jmadlena:

I've already said in PM everything I'm going to say, vis a vis your post, so the following is in no way directed towards you. Thanks.

------

Why is it you folks think the hatred of Bill Gates stems solely from the fact that he's very financially successful? Hmm? I mean, if that's what you really think, I'm here to tell you you're dead wrong.

If it were simply a matter of Bill Gates having come from whatever modest middle-class means he started with (well, actually his dad's a lawyer, so it would probably be "upper" middle class at a minimum), we wouldn't be sitting here having this discussion. I've absolutely no objection to Bill being as successful as he wants to be. The harder you work, the smarter you work, etc., the more successful you should naturally be. Now whether he's literally worked for every last penny of the massive multiple billions of dollars he's personally become worth -- or that of Microsoft's altogether even more massive billions -- one could argue, I suppose, but I'm not in any way in favor of some limit on success. That's Communism right there (well, maybe Socialism a bit, too) and I am absolutely NOT about that kind of crap.

It's a matter of Bill's employed means that's what gives me a problem. Bill, as the head of Microsoft, has had a history of using unscrupulous means of getting ahead -- in the majority of cases to the detriment of other businesses in the industry, and in many, many cases to the detriment of the general public thanks to the choices we've collectively been left with -- and then that's not even a start of covering the issue of gross abuse of monopoly power, etc.

I am aware (though not of the specifics) of the fact of the effects of many/most/all of the European governments' success-limiting policies, laws, and efforts. And not to start some kind of cultural flame war here on MacRumors, but when you consider how those countries are and have been run, is it really any surprise that individuals and businessmen from Europe flee regularly to the U.S. for better circumstances? I mean, America is not a perfect country, but I can tell you that Socialism is not the answer.

Anyhow...

Bill Gates is what he is through the acts he has committed, not the financial success he has enjoyed. Period. End of story.

MikeTheC
Jan 11, 2008, 10:39 AM
I don't understand the US phone market but it strikes me that the iPhone is a more attractive package over there.
I don't have an iPhone myself, but from everyone I know who owns one (I know several people personally), they all seem to think whatever it is they pay a month for their plan is a good deal.

My two biggest objections are the carrier (AT&T -- I've had prior dealings with them and will *NEVER* go back) and the broadcast system. I'm tired of the fact that when I'm on a call I can't go anywhere near self-powered speakers without setting them off with the loudest, most obnoxious squeal that any technology owner has been forced to hear. Now, switch the broadcast system to CDMA and let me get one through SprintPCS, and theoretically I would consider it.

But yeah, we're probably getting a better deal here than you folks are there. It's a pity. But, hey, you know what? Move to Mexico and then sneak across the border. Who knows, you might even get Amnesty! And then you're on the gravy train for life, buddy.

ATimson
Jan 11, 2008, 11:51 AM
I'm tired of the fact that when I'm on a call I can't go anywhere near self-powered speakers without setting them off with the loudest, most obnoxious squeal that any technology owner has been forced to hear.
Huh. Until you pointed this out, and I googled "gsm speakers", I'd never realized that the occasional interference in my speakers was from my phone... I certainly wouldn't call it loud or obnoxious, at least where my dinky little non-smartphone is involved, but I'm glad to finally know the cause! :)

fiftydollarshoe
Jan 11, 2008, 02:06 PM
jmadlena:

------
I am aware (though not of the specifics) of the fact of the effects of many/most/all of the European governments' success-limiting policies, laws, and efforts. And not to start some kind of cultural flame war here on MacRumors, but when you consider how those countries are and have been run, is it really any surprise that individuals and businessmen from Europe flee regularly to the U.S. for better circumstances? I mean, America is not a perfect country, but I can tell you that Socialism is not the answer.


errrrr what ? 11 of the top 20 companies in the world are European and of the remaining 9, 4 are from Asia-Pac; So what are these success limiting polices you refer to ?

....and dont draw the sociisim card because the Russian state owned oil companies are already bigger than Exxon.

You need to check your facts before plagiarising from your year 9 American History text book.

zephead
Jan 11, 2008, 03:04 PM
I'm tired of the fact that when I'm on a call I can't go anywhere near self-powered speakers without setting them off with the loudest, most obnoxious squeal that any technology owner has been forced to hear. Now, switch the broadcast system to CDMA and let me get one through SprintPCS, and theoretically I would consider it.

The iPhone with 3G isn't gonna do that as often. As long as you're in an area with 3G coverage the iPhone will operate on WCDMA, which doesn't buzz speakers since it's a constant connection, as opposed to GSM which is a pulsing connection. I tried this with my 3G Samsung phone right next to some speakers, and they buzz while on GSM, and don't buzz while on WCDMA. Of course, if you don't have 3G coverage the phone will default back to GSM and the buzziness that comes with it.

benfilan
Jan 11, 2008, 03:20 PM
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2013/2184644728_7b9a770c0d_o.jpg

i LOVE this concept.