Highlights of Apple's iPhone OS 3.0 Preview: Copy and Paste, A2DP, MMS, Much More [Archive] - Page 4

diamond.g

Mar 18, 2009, 06:22 AM

easily by using different protocols that adds line of code to the new devices that won't use it therefore adding pointless bloatware to most devices, remember they're trying NOT to be microsoft.
OK, to the people who own a 1st gen iPhone, I understand your disappointment in lack of MMS but I think the post by MrCubes below is the closest/most realistic explanation as to why you've been left out.

To summarize, he says that the MMS spec for EDGE was a mess and it was substantially tightened up for 3G. Apple purchased a complete 3G stack from a third party who specializes in cell phone hardware - so it likely has had the ability to send and receive MMS messages for a while but they had no user interface / lower layer code to support it. What I think MasterNile is getting at is that technically YES - Apple could have supported MMS for 1st gen iPhones but it simply did not make business sense. With the 3G spec, they have to write one module for it and it should work worldwide. With EDGE, the spec was not defined as well and so there are a number of different implementations out in the wild - so they'd have to reinvent the wheel 3, 4, or more different times. That costs real money. No doubt Apple has the talent to do it, it just doesn't make sense (hence why there is a solution in the jailbroken world). On top of that, there's always the chance that one of their implementations isn't perfect and the end-user gets a bad experience from it - which can negatively impact Apple. From a beancounter's perspective, not only did it not cost them money to support it but it provides a handy excuse to get early adopters to upgrade: the proverbial win-win. I think if it was truly as easy as these arm-chair computer engineers on this forum think it is, Apple would have done it.

The lesson to take away from this is if you're an early adopter, be prepared for buyer's remorse. It may not be immediate but eventually you will be left out one way or another. I've never bought anything that has been a first gen - and I absolutely lusted for the iPhone when it was first announced in January 2007. I finally broke down January of this year when my RAZR finally bit the big one and got a 3G and have never looked back.

My advice is to wait for the iPhone Dev Team to jailbreak the 3.0 OS and use one of the many MMS apps out there.
So what happens to those iPhone 3G owners who send an MMS in a coverage area without 3G?

It's a load of BS on Apples part. If your going to give us OS 3.0, give it to us right. Don't force us to upgrade! MMS can be sent over GPRS/EDGE/3G
Beanboy has asked the same question I did. So when those 3G users lose 3G service, they can no longer send or receive MMS. Does anyone really thing Apple would be that stupid? Seriously?
I can understand that. ATT wants 1st Gen iPhone users on 3G in order to make more money. Apple wants 1st Gen iPhone users to buy new phones for more money. I just think from a consumer stand point that if i want MMS on my 1st Gen i gotta pay more when i shouldn't have to.Unless Apples agreement with AT&T for profit sharing (for the 1st gen iPhone owners service) ends after 2 years, Apple stands to make more money by keeping 1st gen owners on the 1st gen phone. Think about it. Not only did Apple get 400-600 dollars, but they also get (rumors) like 10 bucks a month. That is an extra 240 bucks that Apple doesn't see with the 3G. And if the service agreement sharing doesn't end they just keep getting money. Unless everyone here believes that Apple is getting 600-800 bucks from AT&T for each iPhone 3G.

Note that you can't get the Xbox Dashboard update without an Xbox Live account. This is not a coincidence.Not true. There are a ton of 360s not connected to the internet, they all can get the dashboard update. It is included in some of the popular games that go to press after the dashboard update has been released. Or the user can burn a dashboard update disc from microsofts website.

iSamurai

Mar 18, 2009, 06:23 AM

...so what's the hardware limitation to MMS for the 1st generation iPhone? (I don't think you need 3G to send an MMS)

Oliver.m

Mar 18, 2009, 06:34 AM

This update looks so good. I'm not really bothered about MMS but i think being able to forward SMS messages is going to be so useful.

I also can't wait for TomTom to release an iPhone version now they are able to. I remember seeing a demo of it before somewhere so hopefully it won't be far off.

Shaun, UK

Mar 18, 2009, 06:40 AM

Because it was nearly 1am here in the UK (yes, a place that exists outside of the USA) when I posted that and nothing in the page 1 summary appealed to me enough to stay up and watch the entire keynote, which having scanned through was boring as Hell.

So I thought I'd simply ask a question regarding one often requested feature which I thought would be included in any summary, and as it turned out it was worth me asking.

Unfortunately I forgot there's always somebody online prepared to answer with a smartarse comment. :rolleyes:

The Live Blog was so boring I fell asleep half way through.

iGarth

Mar 18, 2009, 06:43 AM

Not true. There are a ton of 360s not connected to the internet, they all can get the dashboard update. It is included in some of the popular games that go to press after the dashboard update has been released. Or the user can burn a dashboard update disc from microsofts website.

Just checked Xbox.com and you're right. That's interesting, I wasn't aware of download option.

Not sure how they are rationalising it then, perhaps arguing it doesn't actually provide any additional functionality (unless you're connected to Xbox Live?), just a revised UI..?

diamond.g

Mar 18, 2009, 06:46 AM

Just checked Xbox.com and you're right. That's interesting, I wasn't aware of download option.

Not sure how they are rationalising it then, perhaps arguing it doesn't actually provide any additional functionality (unless you're connected to Xbox Live?), just a revised UI..?

Bug fixes and some new features.

sintra1

Mar 18, 2009, 06:52 AM

From the Q&A:

Q: Where do you stand on tethering?
A: There’s two pieces needed to support that: client side and working with carriers. We’re absolutely supporting tethering in the client side in iPhone 3.0, but we’re working with carriers around the world to see when they can add tethering support on their networks. But we are building that support into iPhone 3.0.

Are they seriously telling these lies publicly? Carriers (at least in Europe) support tethering for at least 5 years!!! What exactly is Apple working with the carriers on? What a ********.

Actually not quite true most Mobile network consumer contracts explicitly EXCLUDE the right to tether an internet enabled phone and Laptop in Europe.

If your operator observes "excessive" use they have the obligation to investigate and you may find yourself being billed at some astronomical rate for ALL minutes used for breach of contract FACT.

Tethering contracts are available but DO have an extra cost of several Tens of Pounds/Euros over the standard contracts.

Now the very fact the hardware from Nokia and others allow bluetooth tethering with the built-in bluetooth profiles out of the box is a different matter, as these companies phones are generally sold/supplied by differing operators. Carriers can however lock and disable functions and do so in some countries as well.

Regretably Apples business model in the US and UK especially where they have struck Network exclusive deals with AT&T and O2 has certainly resulted in the tethering profile being disabled.
What they are probably working on is a software process that can be enabled by the Carrier on receipt of appropriate payment and subject to contract etc........

richard.mac

Mar 18, 2009, 06:55 AM

what about To Do syncing? i use them much more than Notes and To Dos are integrated into Notes.

headfuzz

Mar 18, 2009, 07:07 AM

I also can't wait for TomTom to release an iPhone version now they are able to. I remember seeing a demo of it before somewhere so hopefully it won't be far off.

Amen, brother.

The day I can finally retire my Xda Orbit (rebadged HTC P3300) because I no longer need it for satnav I will be very happy. :)

nibbet

Mar 18, 2009, 07:21 AM

The MMS hardware limitation is a software one as they are more than capable of sending and receiving MMS. This is false differentiation by apple and an attempt to force you to upgrade.

True but welcome to sales 101

ashjamben

Mar 18, 2009, 07:23 AM

looks interesting.

i hope they bring out a new iphone for the launch aswell. not because a new one is needed or anything, just because i'll be able to get an early upgrade, instead of waiting a year for the end of my contract cos mine was nicked :p

nibbet

Mar 18, 2009, 07:27 AM

what about To Do syncing? i use them much more than Notes and To Dos are integrated into Notes.

I'm with you on this. How ever I purchased ToDo by Appigo and use Toodledo to ssnyc my Todos from my computer.

gnasher729

Mar 18, 2009, 07:39 AM

...so what's the hardware limitation to MMS for the 1st generation iPhone? (I don't think you need 3G to send an MMS)

There is no hardware limitation. As explained by someone else much better in a previous post, but probably too long to read: Apple can buy a perfectly working MMS solution for 3G for very little money, which they probably have done. MMS software before 3G is an absolute mess; the spec for it was unclear, there are dozens of incompatible implementations, there is no ready-made solution available to buy, so Apple would have to spend tons and tons of engineering to get a workable solution. Considering that Apple wouldn't make one penny from all this work, they concentrate on something else.

gnasher729

Mar 18, 2009, 07:46 AM

I would buy a new iPhone to be able to multi-task. I think tons of others would too.

Please explain to us what exactly this magical "multi-tasking" would buy you except slower programs, more problems with memory, and vastly reduced battery life?

My thoughts exactly. I sure hope they held back on features that would give away the next iPhone version. If the Palm Pre works as well as Palm says it will, I see no reason for a non-Mac user to purchase an iPhone. Where was the real innovation revealed in this press conference? I just don't see it...and I LOVE nearly all my Apple products and services ..... so I'm not trolling.

When you say "If the Palm Pre works as well as Palm says it will", do you mean as well as Palm said when they showed it to the public, or as well as Palm's lawyers said when they almost got a heart attack after viewing that show, because most of what they said was going to get them into legal trouble?

Goona

Mar 18, 2009, 07:46 AM

You have to hand it to Apple...

They sure know the definitions of the words BUSINESS and PROFIT.

As much as I would love to be amazed and awed at the added functionalities involved with the impending 3.0 "upgrade," I am just sick of Apple holding out on features it should have already had on the iPhone to begin with, just so they can suck people in later on and play the hero. Almost none of the features going to be added are at all revolutionary, and almost all of them can be found in some phones that have been out on the market for years. Yet all of a sudden MMS and copy and paste FINALLY appears and HALLELUJAH! Apple is GOD and is really working hard to please its customers! Please. It's just lame hyping up this OS as "even more advanced" when it's introducing very few things that are unique and integrating many that should already have been present at the first iteration of the phone. And don't make the claim that
"well, they'll sell more now that people see what they're putting into it" as this argument is pointless, Apple would ALREADY have sold more if they had most
of these things implemented in the first place.

Don't get me wrong, I love my 3G, I think it's an incredible piece of technology and I couldn't imagine switching to anything else at this point because for the
most part, i've been highly satisfied. I just find it kind of funny how much
Apple is being glorified all over again for releasing features that, and I can't
stress this enough, should have already been there since the first iPhone was
released and hyping these features as being advanced, cause they're not.
Apple is the only company that can be praised for injecting "brand new and
advanced features" into a particular product when similar products with
comparable/exact same features exist. This says a lot about Apple
fanboys...So they shouldn't add the featres because other phones have them, name me one single phone that has every user requested feature, what about the features the iPhone has that others don't?

Goona

Mar 18, 2009, 07:55 AM

My thoughts exactly. I sure hope they held back on features that would give away the next iPhone version. If the Palm Pre works as well as Palm says it will, I see no reason for a non-Mac user to purchase an iPhone. Where was the real innovation revealed in this press conference? I just don't see it...and I LOVE nearly all my Apple products and services ..... so I'm not trolling.

What innovation did Palm bring to the table, you better hope your saviour Palm doesn't go bust before the Pre debuts.:

Goona

Mar 18, 2009, 07:57 AM

I'm regretting wasting the $300 on an iPod Touch with yet another 'must pay' update.

So then get an iPhone and pay 100 dollars every month like we do..

jaw04005

Mar 18, 2009, 08:01 AM

...so what's the hardware limitation to MMS for the 1st generation iPhone? (I don't think you need 3G to send an MMS)

For what it's worth, a verified member of Apple's developer tools team posted in a private forum elsewhere that Apple's implementation of MMS goes above and beyond standard MMS because it supports additional files (including audio and text documents). Apple wants their version of MMS to work just like e-mail, and therefore has special encoding requirements that the original iPhone doesn't support.

He did admit that picture messaging MMS would be possible with the original iPhone.

However, who knows if he's accurate.

Personally, I could careless about MMS, but I do think Apple should just implement standard MMS in the original iPhone and their so-called advanced MMS in the iPhone 3G and future revisions.

Oh-es-Ten

Mar 18, 2009, 08:13 AM

I don't know if it has been said before, but Mobile Safari scores 97/100 in Acid3 in 3.0 beta (it was about 74/100 in 2.2)

Wow - that is great. Thanks very much for letting us know that. Amazing to have that on such a small device and build of the browser. Apple has not been sitting around....

hockeyhammer

Mar 18, 2009, 08:16 AM

does anyone have an enroled iphone dev. acount name and password i can have? if you think thats stupid, can a developer upload a link or the file for 3.0 beta please!

Gasu E.

Mar 18, 2009, 08:24 AM

Definitely satire.

That's what I thought when I read it. ;)

chris200x9

Mar 18, 2009, 08:26 AM

WHERE IS MY CAPS LOCK?!!!!!!!!!!!!111

even my cousins cheap chinese rip off iphone has caps lock :p

sishaw

Mar 18, 2009, 08:29 AM

WHERE IS MY CAPS LOCK?!!!!!!!!!!!!111

even my cousins cheap chinese rip off iphone has caps lock :p

Dude, you're kidding, right? You just tap the caps key twice quickly. It's always been there from day 1.

chris200x9

Mar 18, 2009, 08:32 AM

Dude, you're kidding, right? You just tap the caps key twice quickly. It's always been there from day 1.

.....I never knew that, thank you very much for telling me :D

Oh-es-Ten

Mar 18, 2009, 08:33 AM

I think for anyone wondering about voice dialling, the natural user behaviour may be to click and hold the headset button, until you hear and tone, and then perhaps speak the persons name.

Now recently it has become clear (with the new shuffle) that the current iPhone does not support the click and hold function on the headphone remote (single clicks only).

My guess is that the next iPhone hardware rev might support this function natively, and that would explain it's possible absence.

I also think that video is a no-go with this hardware - better processing / encoding is needed, and may need a new camera, processor or dedicated chip for this.

Sambo110

Mar 18, 2009, 08:36 AM

I never knew it had a caps lock. I just held down the upper case button to do multiple capital letters.

sishaw

Mar 18, 2009, 08:40 AM

.....I never knew that, thank you very much for telling me :D

You're welcome, and sorry for being a little sarcastic.

Nice article about the update here in PC Mag:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2343326,00.asp

Sai Zelion

Mar 18, 2009, 08:43 AM

.....I never knew that, thank you very much for telling me :D

You don't just tap Caps twice, you need to go into settings>general.keyboard>"enable Caps lock=on/off
now it will work

sishaw

Mar 18, 2009, 08:47 AM

You don't just tap Caps twice, you need to go into settings>general.keyboard>"enable Caps lock=on/off
now it will work

I probably set that when I first got the iPhone and then forgot...thanks for pointing it out.

randyhudson

Mar 18, 2009, 09:04 AM

No it hasn't. If you don't like it, pay for a new iPhone. When you bought it, you bought it as it was, not as it *might be*.

My 3G will eventually be old and then I'll either live with what I have, or pay to get with the times.

The same is true of your 3G phone, so what's your point? Do you have a valid explanation for why A2DP or MMS couldn't be supported on the first iPhone? The hardware is more than capable of supporting either.

BaldiMac

Mar 18, 2009, 09:16 AM

The same is true of your 3G phone, so what's your point? Do you have a valid explanation for why A2DP or MMS couldn't be supported on the first iPhone? The hardware is more than capable of supporting either.

I don't know anything about A2DP, but a valid explanation has been given many times for MMS. Most likely, the software that Apple developed or obtained for MMS only works with the radio on the iPhone 3G. It does not work with the older radio. They could have put additional development work into supporting the older radio, but chose not to. Either because it would not work as elegantly or because they did not want to bother with the older technology.

Cleverboy

Mar 18, 2009, 09:35 AM

Sending a MMS resulted in a little icon being displayed in the upper right corner of the screen, while the transmission was on. Usually it was an arrow showing up or right. The phone was still usable (as GPRS or even UMTS both wouldn't harm the GSM-signal). On the iPhone 3G data can be transferred simultaneously with voice usage. On the 1st generation iPhone, all data transmission would interrupt the ability to receive phone calls. So, not only would it take a longer period of time to receive an incoming MMS message over EDGE, but during that transmission, you would not be able to make or receive phone calls. Perhaps MMS is through some kind of alternate method that sidesteps this basic fact. I honestly don't know. Maybe someone using SwirlyMMS can tell us if they're able to receive a phone call and an MMS message at the same time? I'm assuming SwirlyMMS must be able to work as a background task.
Receiving a MMS always was perceived as a passive process by me. I never experienced any lag, as I had the impression, that the MMS was loaded in the background and my phone released the notification as soon as the whole MMS was on my phone. I'm sure that is how Apple is implementing the feature on the iPhone 3G.
So basically on 5 different handsets there was no perceivable 'lag' and the phone was not rendered unusable during data transmission (though uploading an MMS could effectively be about a minute). The most relevant part of what you're saying... for me... would be WHICH handsets (whether EDGE or 3G devices) on WHICH network (AT&T or T-Mobile). Because it didn't offer MMS, its possible Apple did not make the right EDGE radio choice if indeed MMS and voice can be handled simultaneously on certain EDGE networks.
I personally think the argument would rather be: "We like that coll geo-tagged MMS, which can't be used with iPhone 2G, because it has no GPS chip." That's all. And gimme a break: Contact data via MMS - hooray Apple, welcome to the 90s! Apple's all about simplicity. I think its much better to say 1G iPhone's don't do MMS, than to have LAME MMS support that doesn't measure up to the 3G implementation. $199 isn't really that much money, if you're already "in it" for active MMS service usage.

~ CB

Greg McBride

Mar 18, 2009, 09:54 AM

Bubba Satori

Mar 18, 2009, 09:56 AM

Well done Apple. Impressive.

headfuzz

Mar 18, 2009, 10:07 AM

I'm part of the developer program and want to install the 3.0 Beta. However, it "locks" your iPhone into 3.0 and does not allow you to reinstall an earlier OS. I don't have a dedicated testing phone so I want to make sure it's a fully functional beta OS before I install it on my iPhone. Can anyone confirm this?

It's no doubt stable until it's not, at which point you're in a world of pain. ;)

EgbertAttrick

Mar 18, 2009, 10:08 AM

Apple, with both the iPhone AND the ability to easily and drastically update its features, has absolutely rewritten the book on cellular phones, and I could not be happier with the $300 is spent on my iPhone and the $94 I spend on service every month. I, like most everyone else here, I assume, cannot wait for this update.

Since I don't have time to read 32 pages of lively banter, perhaps someone who has been following along can give a me a recap of the negatives that people are moaning about. I'm very curious as to what the complaints still are, as I believe this is the most complete and impressive update for any phone in the brief history of cell phones.

Greg McBride

Mar 18, 2009, 10:09 AM

It's no doubt stable until it's not, at which point you're in a world of pain. ;)

I know it would be a huge risk. I should probably just hold off until more developers post feedback. Or, maybe I can scrounge up a used iPhone for dev purposes.

diamond.g

Mar 18, 2009, 10:16 AM

On the iPhone 3G data can be transferred simultaneously with voice usage. On the 1st generation iPhone, all data transmission would interrupt the ability to receive phone calls. So, not only would it take a longer period of time to receive an incoming MMS message over EDGE, but during that transmission, you would not be able to make or receive phone calls. Perhaps MMS is through some kind of alternate method that sidesteps this basic fact. I honestly don't know. Maybe someone using SwirlyMMS can tell us if they're able to receive a phone call and an MMS message at the same time? I'm assuming SwirlyMMS must be able to work as a background task.
I'm sure that is how Apple is implementing the feature on the iPhone 3G.
The most relevant part of what you're saying... for me... would be WHICH handsets (whether EDGE or 3G devices) on WHICH network (AT&T or T-Mobile). Because it didn't offer MMS, its possible Apple did not make the right EDGE radio choice if indeed MMS and voice can be handled simultaneously on certain EDGE networks.
Apple's all about simplicity. I think its much better to say 1G iPhone's don't do MMS, than to have LAME MMS support that doesn't measure up to the 3G implementation. $199 isn't really that much money, if you're already "in it" for active MMS service usage.

~ CB
So what happens when you don't have 3G service? You lose MMS?

headfuzz

Mar 18, 2009, 10:20 AM

So what happens when you don't have 3G service?

The fabric of the universe gets a hole torn in it.

diamond.g

Mar 18, 2009, 10:30 AM

The fabric of the universe gets a hole torn in it.

:D

I do find it amusing that everyone that is sticking to the "it needs 3G to work" is just glossing over that condition. Which is a possibility for some, whom buy the iPhone 3G and don't live in an area where 3G is offered yet.

rcha101

Mar 18, 2009, 10:44 AM

I like:
-notes syncing
-landscape keyboard in all apps
-ability to turn off repeat beep for text
-ability to delete multiple photos
-ability to send text in the background while typing a new one
-vcard support and ability to email/text contact to people
-Find my phone/ipod touch function in mobile me

But, I would still like:
-FM radio accessory/headset like ipod (touch?)
-Nike+ intergration (like ipod touch)
-'disk use' option (as was available on ipod)

sintra1

Mar 18, 2009, 11:14 AM

"Up" being a relative term here.

Wish Apple would just serve the vids through iTunes where they have the infrastructure in place to make it work. I rarely get the QT feed of these things to play and even when it does, it stutters badly.

If it stutters in QT it'll stutter within iTunes as QT IS the embedded player anyways.

The sttuttering is without doubt due to your network connection!

jaw04005

Mar 18, 2009, 12:28 PM

So what happens when you don't have 3G service? You lose MMS?

There's no way that's the reason. My Nokia camera phone from 2002 supports MMS over GPRS (precursor to EDGE).

Minimoose 360

Mar 18, 2009, 12:30 PM

This deserves a big :3

Very pleased.

diamond.g

Mar 18, 2009, 12:35 PM

There's no way that's the reason. My Nokia camera phone from 2002 supports MMS over GPRS (precursor to EDGE).

Based on what Apple has said, it has to be...

gorebeast

Mar 18, 2009, 12:36 PM

I'm part of the developer program and want to install the 3.0 Beta. However, it "locks" your iPhone into 3.0 and does not allow you to reinstall an earlier OS. I don't have a dedicated testing phone so I want to make sure it's a fully functional beta OS before I install it on my iPhone. Can anyone confirm this?

**stares with wide, glazed eyes** Join us...you'll never want to leave...it is foolish to reinstall...all will join us at 3.0...join us...:eek:

MasterNile

Mar 18, 2009, 01:03 PM

Cleverboy

Mar 18, 2009, 01:17 PM

So what happens when you don't have 3G service? You lose MMS?
Precisely. Like GPS service. Should be easy enough for some adventurous soul to check this basic premise out on the beta firmware. I personally suspect a very nuanced answer for the discerning tester (with respect to sending/receiving/queing messages), and I also suspect some details will certainly change between now and launch.

~ CB

goosnarrggh

Mar 18, 2009, 01:26 PM

I don't believe that explanation either. For example, Sony has released lots of free firmware updates to PSP, and those updates have included some brand new features (Skype, PSP Store, Internet Radio, Messenger, RSS Channel etc).

I don't understand how Sony can deliver free updates to PSP, while accounting issues force Apple to charge for the updates. Wouldn't the same accounting issues also force Sony to charge for the PSP updates?

Well, Sony might have chosen to spread out recognition of the money it received for the sale of a PSP over a number of years. In that case, it would be satisfying GAAP requirements for an "incomplete" sale, and free updates would be totally OK.

Similarly, Apple could have chosen to do the same when accounting for the money it receives for the sale of an iPod touch. Apparently, for whatever reason, they decided not to.

Personally, I will find it interesting to see what happens 24 months after the initial sale of the first 2.5G iPhones. Then, once their GAAP excuse runs out of steam, will Apple stop issuing firmware updates for those phones? Or else will Apple start charging for them?

goosnarrggh

Mar 18, 2009, 01:28 PM

Precisely. Like GPS service. Should be easy enough for some adventurous soul to check this basic premise out on the beta firmware. I personally suspect a very nuanced answer for the discerning tester (with respect to sending/receiving/queing messages), and I also suspect some details will certainly change between now and launch.

~ CB

Indeed, it is physically possible for some phones connected to GPRS and/or EDGE networks to send/receive MMS. As evidence, look at the variety of 2G/2.5G phones which do exactly that.

The distinction in the iPhone's case must lie elsewhere.

soup4you2

Mar 18, 2009, 01:30 PM

I feel I'm the only person not excited for the update. Sure there are some cool new features, but i doubt i will be using them.

I'll wait until 3.2 comes out before updating. give them time to work out the bugs that are destined to be found.

MasterNile

Mar 18, 2009, 01:31 PM

Well, Sony might have chosen to spread out recognition of the money it received for the sale of a PSP over a number of years. In that case, it would be satisfying GAAP requirements for an "incomplete" sale, and free updates would be totally OK.

Similarly, Apple could have chosen to do the same when accounting for the money it receives for the sale of an iPod touch. Apparently, for whatever reason, they decided not to.

Personally, I will find it interesting to see what happens 24 months after the initial sale of the first 2.5G iPhones. Then, once their GAAP excuse runs out of steam, will Apple stop issuing firmware updates for those phones? Or else will Apple start charging for them?

Perhaps that's another reason they don't allow MMS on the 1st gen iPhones, another push for consumers to upgrade so they don't have to hear as much complaining when they start charging 1st gen iPhone users for upgrades.

Nym

Mar 18, 2009, 01:34 PM

It's not the same thing. You can embed H.264 on a site and have your browser use any number of players to watch it. When it's embedded INSIDE a .swf file which is embedded on a site, you must use flash to watch it.
Lets not have facts get in the way here.

FYI.

In most circumstances where you would view Flash video on the web the video itself is not embedded in the SWF file. Usually the SWF file has a FLVPlayback component which has a reference to the video file on the server (could be an mp4 file as far as we know).

It's a proprietary container (as QuickTime is) which simply links to the video file. Besides, you also either need QuickTime Player or WMP to play any kind of video on the web. Flash Player is just "another" player, proprietary like the rest.

Just to clear things up a bit.

Flash is not Satan's Spawn! :) As it is with software, if the developer is good, the product is good.
If you have Flash Player 10 installed I suggest you check this out. Not everything Flash is bad!

http://www.hobnox.com/audiotool.1046.de.html

diamond.g

Mar 18, 2009, 01:55 PM

Perhaps that's another reason they don't allow MMS on the 1st gen iPhones, another push for consumers to upgrade so they don't have to hear as much complaining when they start charging 1st gen iPhone users for upgrades.

But why would that happen? Doesn't Apple still get a cut of the service for 1st gen iPhone owners?

MasterNile

Mar 18, 2009, 02:17 PM

But why would that happen? Doesn't Apple still get a cut of the service for 1st gen iPhone owners?

I'm not sure exactly how it works, if you are a 1st gen iPhone owner and your 2 year contract expires and you try to renew your contract do you pay the same amount per month or do you have to pay the same price as iPhone 3G owners? If you renew is Apple still getting a percent of the monthly fee for the renewed contract or was AT&Ts deal with Apple that they only get a percent of the original contract and not any renewals?

diamond.g

Mar 18, 2009, 02:23 PM

I'm not sure exactly how it works, if you are a 1st gen iPhone owner and your 2 year contract expires and you try to renew your contract do you pay the same amount per month or do you have to pay the same price as iPhone 3G owners? If you renew is Apple still getting a percent of the monthly fee for the renewed contract or was AT&Ts deal with Apple that they only get a percent of the original contract and not any renewals?

As far as I know, there is no need to renew. You continue paying AT&T your current rate. You are just able to cancel at anytime. The real question must be, does Apple still get a cut after the contract terms have been fulfilled.

MasterNile

Mar 18, 2009, 02:27 PM

As far as I know, there is no need to renew. You continue paying AT&T your current rate. You are just able to cancel at anytime. The real question must be, does Apple still get a cut after the contract terms have been fulfilled.

Do you know when the exclusive contract w/ AT&T ends? I think I've read 2009 on one article and 2010 in another article but don't remember which one was more recent. If it's 2009 then Apple probably doesn't get a cut after the contract terms have been fulfilled.

diamond.g

Mar 18, 2009, 02:28 PM

Do you know when the exclusive contract w/ AT&T ends? I think I've read 2009 on one article and 2010 in another article but don't remember which one was more recent. If it's 2009 then Apple probably doesn't get a cut after the contract terms have been fulfilled.

No clue, but that would be an issue... Of course if exclusivity does end this year, maybe Verizon could get an iPhone ;)

MasterNile

Mar 18, 2009, 02:34 PM

No clue, but that would be an issue... Of course if exclusivity does end this year, maybe Verizon could get an iPhone ;)

Man if the iPhone opened up to all US carriers (or at least the major ones) I would buy one in an instant, that's what I'm waiting for more than anything. Now it's just a question of when it ends and if Apple will extend the exclusivity contract with AT&T.

Since this kind of relates to the other tethering thread does Verizon have free tethering option? I know someone said T mobile does.

diamond.g

Mar 18, 2009, 02:35 PM

Man if the iPhone opened up to all US carriers (or at least the major ones) I would buy one in an instant, that's what I'm waiting for more than anything. Now it's just a question of when it ends and if Apple will extend the exclusivity contract with AT&T.

Since this kind of relates to the other tethering thread does Verizon have free tethering option? I know someone said T mobile does.

Verizon, as far as I know, has the same limit as AT&T (5GB/month).

MasterNile

Mar 18, 2009, 02:38 PM

Verizon, as far as I know, has the same limit as AT&T (5GB/month).

Yeah I assumed the 5GB/month limit, but do you have to pay an extra $30 or whatever to legitimately have the tethering option with Verizon?

diamond.g

Mar 18, 2009, 02:46 PM

Yeah I assumed the 5GB/month limit, but do you have to pay an extra $30 or whatever to legitimately have the tethering option with Verizon?

I do believe so.

mvpkent

Mar 18, 2009, 02:49 PM

ok i've been reading macrumors since the day the iphone was first unveiled to the public and am always amazed by the petty little gripes and complaints that so many people seem to have. I waited in line day 1 like many others to shell out $600 for the 1st generation iphone. I also waited in line for the iphone 3G on day 1 (with one hell of a hangover i might add.) From the moment i started using the first iphone i knew i had by far the best phone on the market. I was amazed at how simple it was to use and how intelligently it had been designed. With a few updates, they fixed a few shortcoming but of course ppl still weren't satisfied. Then they released the iphone 3G a year later which is even a more amazing phone along with the app store which is equally impressive. And now we are getting 3.0 which is simply incredible in my opinion after watching the keynote video. It seems to me Apple doesn't ever just throw something out there until they have nearly perfected it which makes sense to me. Ppl have been fussing about copy and paste for so long. But now that we are going to have it, I can see why it may have taken some time. It's nearly perfect in the way it works and the way it works across all apps. It's genius if you ask me and i never really gave a damn about getting it in the first place. So now everybody gets their cut, copy, and paste along with all their landscape keyboards that i again could really care less about but obviously so many others did. We get our MMS which i actually do care about but was living a very complete life without none-the-less. We get background notifications which is another example of apple getting it right. Ok so now i'm getting winded...but i just wanted to say that those of you who complain about every little tiny thing must live the most miserable lives; I would hate to be you or one of your family members because undoubtedly this negative energy spills over into every aspect of your lives. If you don't own an iphone quit telling all of us what it'll take for you to actually pony up and buy one cause i for one don't give a *****. And if you do own one and aren't 150% satisfied, go out and buy that phone that you seem to think is better cause that's what i would do rather than bitch and moan all the time. This phone is easily 5 years ahead of the competition and they will never ever catch up to Apple on this one. I'm so tired of my friends showing me their iphone wannabe and then realizing a week later that it doesn't even compare. I wouldn't trade my iphone for any other phone out there. I couldn't be more satisfied with my purchase.

MistaBungle

Mar 18, 2009, 03:10 PM

idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs. idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs. idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs. idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs. idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs. idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs. idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs. idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs. idontlikeparagraphs.idontlikeparagraphs.

I agree completely. Makes me enjoy having a cell phone.

TuffLuffJimmy

Mar 18, 2009, 03:18 PM

<snip!>

When you learn how to break something into paragraphs I'll be willing to read what you have to say.

georgetang

Mar 18, 2009, 03:31 PM

Tethering is a function included in most phone, and that's like several years ago.

You see before tethering via cable, and then moved to Bluetooth, I've used both in Asia and Europe.

After moving to the US, I've notice AT&T and most other T-Mobile, etc. are charging customer for tethering?

What the heck?

I didn't pay for it, and using tethering whenever I'm on biz trip, with my Nokia E61, BTW, I have iPhone 2G AT&T plan but using no iPhone. I know it's slow, but when I was in Europe and Asia I've done it through 3G service on the same phone.

And have been doing tethering for almost 2 years now, here in the US.

I believe tethering charge is just another excuse most US Mobile carrier are trying to cash $$$$.

PEOPLE please wake up, you don't need to pay tethering.

MasterNile

Mar 18, 2009, 03:34 PM

TuffLuffJimmy

Mar 18, 2009, 03:37 PM

mikelcroft

Mar 18, 2009, 04:21 PM

First gen iPhones can't handle MMS due to hardware limitations?

That's the stupidest thing I've heard.

Cleverboy

Mar 18, 2009, 05:04 PM

Indeed, it is physically possible for some phones connected to GPRS and/or EDGE networks to send/receive MMS. As evidence, look at the variety of 2G/2.5G phones which do exactly that.
The distinction in the iPhone's case must lie elsewhere. Ok. I'm talking about VOICE and EDGE "data" usage simultaneously. I'm not saying anything about MMS and EDGE data usage simultaneously... as far as I'm concerned, they're Apples and Apples.

So, to recap, I was expecting a statement more like this: "Indeed, it is physically possible for some phones connected to EDGE networks to send/receive MMS data transfers while conducting normal cellular voice operations."

To illustrate, THIS is the disagreement we SHOULD be having (if we disagree at all). This is a conversation copied from the Howard Forum website (http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/938723-1.html) in June of 2006:
Originally Posted by baaadandy
Why are you saying EDGE, 1x, and GPRS can do voice and data at the same time??? Not true. I would say EDGE is offered in 65-70% of the country. 1x and EDGE seem to both cap off around 170Kbps.Originally Posted by S.Y.N.D.
Why are you saying that GRPS/EDGE can't do voice/data at the same time?

I know I get SMS messages through GRPS while on the phone.

My phone appears to get email messages while I am talking on the phone - and my email uses a VPN connection.

Is it just appearance? Not sure.. please explain.Originally Posted by baaadandy
Well, everyone can get SMS messages while on the phone, they work differently than packet data. I think it just appears that you are receiving e-mail messages as it's not possible that I know of with any US GSM provider to do voice and data as in packet data simultaneously. Heck, it's not possible with ANY US provider, period (aside from CDMA EVDO rev. A and HSDPA; Rev. A isn't deployed yet and Cingular's 3g isn't very widely used yet). So, in our case... I'm agreeing with baaadandy's comments, and perhaps erroneously (maybe someone can enlighten me) adding that MMS is NOT the same as SMS and travels a similar route as other data transmissions (thus preventing simultaneous voice usage on an EDGE network).

--This, in turn, would mean that usage of MMS is much more problematic for these phones, than phones with more modern 3G radios. In this day and age, you might even say that its so "lame", that, even if you could get it working consistently the way one would expect... it would spur a plethora of phone calls from EDGE users, wondering why they encounter certain unintuitive technical issues that 3G users do not.

Jut look at Swirly MMS technical complaints on both T-Mobile and ATT&T. Some of it sounds like carrier issues, others sound like technical glitches related to how reliably the technology works on EDGE.
Posted by: droobie
As far as I know the majority of GSM phones do not support simultaneous voice and data. This will be something that 3G will give us hopefully. Indeed it does, droobie.

~ CB

Cleverboy

Mar 18, 2009, 05:10 PM

First gen iPhones can't handle MMS due to hardware limitations? That's the stupidest thing I've heard. Kind of like the idea that Apple can't produce a sub-$500 computer. At some point, its up to the manufacturer to identify the level of CRAPTACULOUSNESS they wish to expose to the market. While opinions may differ, Apple seems to have a solid level of customer appreciation with the iPhone that others should envy... even the ones doing MMS on EDGE phones.

That's right. I invented that word. I'm registering the domain name now.

~ CB

diamond.g

Mar 18, 2009, 05:20 PM

Ok. I'm talking about VOICE and EDGE "data" usage simultaneously. I'm not saying anything about MMS and EDGE data usage simultaneously... as far as I'm concerned, they're Apples and Apples.

So, to recap, I was expecting a statement more like this: "Indeed, it is physically possible for some phones connected to EDGE networks to send/receive MMS data transfers while conducting normal cellular voice operations."

To illustrate, THIS is the disagreement we SHOULD be having (if we disagree at all). This is a conversation copied from the Howard Forum website (http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/938723-1.html) in June of 2006:
So, in our case... I'm agreeing with baaadandy's comments, and perhaps erroneously (maybe someone can enlighten me) adding that MMS is NOT the same as SMS and travels a similar route as other data transmissions (thus preventing simultaneous voice usage on an EDGE network).

--This, in turn, would mean that usage of MMS is much more problematic for these phones, than phones with more modern 3G radios. In this day and age, you might even say that its so "lame", that, even if you could get it working consistently the way one would expect... it would spur a plethora of phone calls from EDGE users, wondering why they encounter certain unintuitive technical issues that 3G users do not.

Jut look at Swirly MMS technical complaints on both T-Mobile and ATT&T. Some of it sounds like carrier issues, others sound like technical glitches related to how reliably the technology works on EDGE.
Indeed it does, droobie.

~ CB
Basically MMS = SMS + Attachment. Everyone should at least read the Wiki on MMS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multimedia_Messaging_Service).

WAP (traditionally) is used to retrieve the attachment. In this case the WAP may be pointing to a http server of some sort.

str1f3

Mar 18, 2009, 05:32 PM

Most popular complaints lately:
No ability to take videos using built in camera
No MMS on 1st Gen iPhones
No Voice dialing
and people are not sure how well the background apps (push) is going to work

I'm going to assume the push notification works well. None of these other issues are a problem. It is just useless whining. The one major problem I see is the alert system. The problems are:

-people can have instant messages and other apps coming in every minute and a single alert screen is not going to work.
-the alert screen forces you to deal with that first and whatever you are doing second. Only iCal should have that ability.
-you will not see multiple notifications at once forcing you to constantly deal with the alert screen messages.

Apple did not think this up very well. This will not scale well. Android and the Pre have shown better alternatives to this idea because it does not get in your way and you have a way to see all of your updates at once. This is a very serious issue that apple has to deal with.

MasterNile

Mar 18, 2009, 05:36 PM

I'm going to assume the push notification works well. None of these other issues are a problem. It is just useless whining. The one major problem I see is the alert system. The problems are:

-people can have instant messages and other apps coming in every minute and a single alert screen is not going to work.
-the alert screen forces you to deal with that first and whatever you are doing second. Only iCal should have that ability.
-you will not see multiple notifications at once forcing you to constantly deal with the alert screen messages.

Apple did not think this up very well. This will not scale well. Android and the Pre have shown better alternatives to this idea because it does not get in your way and you have a way to see all of your updates at once. This is a very serious issue that apple has to deal with.

I agree with you, just the person that I was replying to asked what people were moaning about now, so I gave him a recap as he didn't want to read through all the pages.

twoodcc

Mar 18, 2009, 05:58 PM

can't wait for this to be released with the new iphone this summer!

swagi

Mar 18, 2009, 06:14 PM

Kind of like the idea that Apple can't produce a sub-$500 computer. At some point, its up to the manufacturer to identify the level of CRAPTACULOUSNESS they wish to expose to the market. While opinions may differ, Apple seems to have a solid level of customer appreciation with the iPhone that others should envy... even the ones doing MMS on EDGE phones.

That's right. I invented that word. I'm registering the domain name now.

~ CB

O.K. Maybe we can agree to the following.

We both know, that the so called "hardware limitation" is a marketing lie by Apple.

You think it's o.K., that Apple will only allow the full 'Apple MMS experience', and therefore 3G and GPS is a must (esp. considering your location).

I think it is a blatant attempt to force first gen iPhone user into an upgrade.

We are both entitled to have our opinions, but maybe we can agree that we don't buy into this "hardware limitation" crap, as handsets nearly a decade old could perfectly work with MMS all over the world. (And I know for sure, that my first UMTS handset was a Nokia one, therefore the Siemens S55, the Siemens S65 and the LG Chocolate do MMS just fine over GPRS).

Cleverboy

Mar 18, 2009, 06:49 PM

Basically MMS = SMS + Attachment. Everyone should at least read the Wiki on MMS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multimedia_Messaging_Service). WAP (traditionally) is used to retrieve the attachment. In this case the WAP may be pointing to a http server of some sort. MMS is a data transmission that runs alongside the SMS message. I think that's effectively what I was saying regarding the whole stew of whether EDGE data (MMS attachment) and VOICE service (incoming phone call, concurrent phone call) can operate at the same time on an EDGE only radio. Looking at the Wiki article, I thought the "challenges" section was interesting:
Content adaptation - Multimedia content created by one brand of MMS phone may not be entirely compatible with the capabilities of the recipients' MMS phone. In the MMS architecture, the recipient MMSC is responsible for providing for content adaptation (e.g., image resizing, audio codec transcoding, etc.)
Distribution lists - Since most SMSC vendors have adopted FTP as an ad-hoc method by which large distribution lists are transferred to the SMSC prior to being used in a bulk-messaging SMS submission, it is expected that MMSC vendors will also adopt FTP.
Bulk messaging - The flow of peer-to-peer MMS messaging involves several over-the-air transactions that become inefficient when MMS is used to send messages to large numbers of subscribers, as is typically the case for VASPs.
Handset Configuration - Unlike SMS, MMS requires a number of handset parameters to be set. Poor handset configuration is often blamed as the first point of failure for many users. Service settings are sometimes preconfigured on the handset, but mobile operators are now looking at new device management technologies as a means of delivering the necessary settings for data services (MMS, WAP, etc.) via over-the-air programming (OTA).
WAP Push - Few mobile network operators offer direct connectivity to their MMSCs for content providers. This has resulted in many content providers using WAP push as the only method available to deliver 'rich content' to mobile handsets. WAP push enables 'rich content' to be delivered to a handset by specifying the URL (via binary SMS) of a pre-compiled MMS, hosted on a content provider's web server. A consequence is that the receiver who pays WAP per kb or minute (as opposed to a flat monthly fee) pays for receiving the MMS, as opposed to only paying for sending one, and also paying a different rate.
The devil is ALWAYS in the details, and Apple holds its cards close to its chest, and tries to portray the least complicated rationale for its decisions (while remaining ostensibly truthful). I'm willing to bet "content adaptation", customer experience, uniformity (if its available, it functions like "this"), and managing handset configuration played a significant role in how Apple approached MMS. If Apple really wanted to implement MMS on all their handsets at all costs... they could have looked at it as a welcome challenge and figure out some unique approaches that met with their needs. It would just be highly problematic and a very poor investment of scarce resources at the end of the day.
O.K. Maybe we can agree to the following.
We both know, that the so called "hardware limitation" is a marketing lie by Apple.
I think citing "hardware issues" as the reason they don't do it, might be interpreted as the reason they "can't" do it... which I think would be incorrect. One moderator commented at the beginning of the thread, that this limitation is purely for financial gain, and an excuse to get people to upgrade their hardware. I think its NOT "purely" to get people to upgrade their phones. I think there is a serious hardware-related issue at root... and that if it were simple to support, Apple would not hesitate to throw the feature to 1G users and call it a day. --They just refuse to spend much ADDITIONAL money on backwards compatibility. You think it's o.K., that Apple will only allow the full 'Apple MMS experience', and therefore 3G and GPS is a must (esp. considering your location). I think it is a blatant attempt to force first gen iPhone user into an upgrade. We are both entitled to have our opinions, but maybe we can agree that we don't buy into this "hardware limitation" crap, as handsets nearly a decade old could perfectly work with MMS all over the world. (And I know for sure, that my first UMTS handset was a Nokia one, therefore the Siemens S55, the Siemens S65 and the LG Chocolate do MMS just fine over GPRS). MMS support did not exist in iPhone 1.0. Or 1.1. Or 1.3. Or 2.0... or 2.1... It simply hasn't been there. Each of the phones you mention can have any number of disparate, orphaned development efforts in how their MMS is implemented. Apple has finally chosen to implement MMS for its 3G iPhone hardware and the hardware of future devices... and chose NOT to go back and architect a solution for 1st generation iPhone users on their EDGE radio.

I think the difference between our opinion is that you feel your cynicism over Apple's "explanation" as simply common-sense ("follow the money"). I see Apple's "explanation" as a simplification of a set of complex challenges regarding how they approach MMS support moving forward. Trust me, when Apple released their Apple TV, and only supported digital sets... my mind was bending over the fact that I didn't have a digital set at the time, and that maybe Apple was trying push digital televisions through its stores. Eventually, I came to realize that digital tvs are what everyone should have, and that Apple's decision was forward thinking and correct. I think its the same case here. Similarly, I also think Apple, as a company, would prefer NOT to use DRM, while so many people have criticized them for using it... because it tends toward creating a "walled garden", which makes them more money. I can see why it doesn't make sense for them in the long run. I think Jobs did too. Like the the online music challenge, I think Apple's "MMS" implementation hurdles has more to do with providing a single solution that is manageable across all their iPhone versions in all countries... than it does with whether they could launch MMS on any single device running iPhone OS in a given country like the U.S.

Some choices aren't always about "following the money". Sometimes companies need to made tough choices that keep the focus on progress and not unnecessary extravagance or time sinks.

~ CB

diamond.g

Mar 18, 2009, 07:17 PM

MMS is a data transmission that runs alongside the SMS message. I think that's effectively what I was saying regarding the whole stew of whether EDGE data (MMS attachment) and VOICE service (incoming phone call, concurrent phone call) can operate at the same time on an EDGE only radio. Looking at the Wiki article, I thought the "challenges" section was interesting:<snip>
~ CB

So the inability to get data while on the phone is supposed to be the entire reason for not allowing the 1G to get MMS? Again, so when the iPhone 3G isn't in 3G service does it still get MMS?

MistaBungle

Mar 18, 2009, 07:20 PM

MasterNile

Mar 18, 2009, 07:25 PM

That's an interesting theory. That because EDGE can't handle voice+data at the same time, it can't handle MMS. Seems simple enough. I hope Apple actually has a legit reason why this doesn't work and isn't claiming some ******** reason that hackers/investigators find.

Well we already know MMS work on the 1st Gen iPhone through hacks, it's been that way since just about the beginning of jailbreaking, the question is why isn't Apple allowing it? Looking at the info it seems we're all grasping at straws and I think basically the reason they don't allow it is cause they didn't see much point in putting in the extra cost/effort when the return would be minimal, they want you to buy more stuff, that's what it comes down to in the end.

EDIT: either way the end result is the same despite the reason, if you have a 1st gen iPhone either don't use MMS, upgrade, or jailbreak.

MistaBungle

Mar 18, 2009, 07:27 PM

Yeah. I personally don't care for MMS. I have zero interest in sending or receiving. CCP, Tethering, Landscape and Spotlight. That's where the party is at.

str1f3

Mar 18, 2009, 07:42 PM

MasterNile

Mar 18, 2009, 07:51 PM

Engadget is now reporting that in the new 3.0 when you go to publish an image it says "publish video" instead. Can you guess what's coming on hardware 3.0? Look like OS 3.0 has more things coming.

I'd give a link but I'm on my iPhone.

LOL at least soon you won't have that problem anymore.

EDIT:
Also in the MobileMe section, it now says Publish Video when you go to publish an image. It's an odd typo, to be sure, and while video recording has been near the top of our wishlist for some time, we're not about to get our hopes up.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/18/usb-tethering-publish-video-and-find-my-iphone-found-in-os-3-0/

badmac78

Mar 18, 2009, 08:06 PM

ok . . . is it me, or did Apple just hand the world it's first TriCorder? I may be a geek, but if I now have access to Accessories, I can effectively add a chemistry set on the end of the phone and send back data . . . this thing is so far beyond being a phone . . .

Cleverboy

Mar 18, 2009, 08:29 PM

So the inability to get data while on the phone is supposed to be the entire reason for not allowing the 1G to get MMS? Again, so when the iPhone 3G isn't in 3G service does it still get MMS?If it was the "entire" reason my post would have been shorter, wouldn't it? Sigh. Nevermind though. I guess all my spitballing and I'm the only one who'll admit to guessing at things we don't know.

Apple bad! I'm with ya now. DRM, no MMS for iPhone 2007 customers, and charging iPod Touch owners. Cheap corporate bastids. That's an interesting theory. That because EDGE can't handle voice+data at the same time, it can't handle MMS. Seems simple enough. I hope Apple actually has a legit reason why this doesn't work and isn't claiming some ******** reason that hackers/investigators find. No one said it "can't handle MMS". I could quote myself saying precisely the opposite, but I'm going to assume at this point I may as well be speaking pig-latin for all the attention you're paying to what I'm actually implying.

~ CB

Doju

Mar 18, 2009, 08:40 PM

diamond.g

Mar 18, 2009, 08:44 PM

If it was the "entire" reason my post would have been shorter, wouldn't it? Sigh. Nevermind though. I guess all my spitballing and I'm the only one who'll admit to guessing at things we don't know.

Apple bad! I'm with ya now. DRM, no MMS for iPhone 2007 customers, and charging iPod Touch owners. Cheap corporate bastids. No one said it "can't handle MMS". I could quote myself saying precisely the opposite, but I'm going to assume at this point I may as well be speaking pig-latin for all the attention you're paying to what I'm actually implying.

~ CB

I will admit to not knowing either. It just seems odd that Apple, with all their money, can't/won't get MMS working on the 1G iPhone. I guess all I want to know at this point is if MMS will work on the 3G iPhone when it isn't in 3G service.

Coupled with knowing all we can about the differences in radio (besides the 3G) hopefully we can get a better picture of what the problem is.

Honestly I have no real problem with Apple exercising its capitalistic rights, shoot if I were running the place I would squeeze every last cent from all its fans. <shrug> :D

kdarling

Mar 18, 2009, 09:10 PM

ok . . . is it me, or did Apple just hand the world it's first TriCorder? .

Such handheld instrumentation (and more) has been around for years on Windows CE, DOS and proprietary OS devices.

For example, almost ten years ago I did a field application where a plugin test device communicated its results into a handheld.

Back in the beginning of what MS called Pocket PCs, most had a CF card slot, where you could plug in all sorts of interesting miniaturized sensors. Later they graduated to using Bluetooth connections.

As for the first "real" TriCorder, many consider that to have been Vital Technologies 1996 Mark I (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tricorder#.22Real.22_tricorders) :)

Cleverboy

Mar 18, 2009, 09:31 PM

I will admit to not knowing either. It just seems odd that Apple, with all their money, can't/won't get MMS working on the 1G iPhone. I guess all I want to know at this point is if MMS will work on the 3G iPhone when it isn't in 3G service. I'm anxious to know this too. Someone I'd read earlier said that MMS would not be available when 3G service wasn't. It sure sounds mighty peculiar. Whether its Gruber, Dilger, or Wu... I'm sure the answer, when it comes, will sound logical to some and suspect to others.
Coupled with knowing all we can about the differences in radio (besides the 3G) hopefully we can get a better picture of what the problem is. Indeed. It might be my own weakness, but I'm treating Apple's response like a cryptic puzzle to figure out, which puts me in danger of looking for an answer to something that might not even be a question.
Honestly I have no real problem with Apple exercising its capitalistic rights, shoot if I were running the place I would squeeze every last cent from all its fans. <shrug> :D Ever since I picked up the book Zen and the Art of the Macintosh, I've unfortunately been inducted into the society that empathizes deeply with Apple's dedication to simplicity and greasing the wheels of consumer appreciation by making tough choices.

Whether its Steve Job's interview with Rollingstone Magazine, where he tries to convince the record industry that DRM doesn't work before finding a happy medium, or when they lowered the price of DVD's from $20 to $5 a pop, or when they started releasing their iLife and iWork packages at obscene prices like $79... I think I "got it". They charge what they think the market will bear, and they make a habit of trying to concentrate on getting average people to use above-average software solutions. When I saw the Lotus background on the iPhone, I thought it was fitting.

Why GarageBand, itself, didn't start at $129, if Apple was trying to squeeze people, I don't know. The way I see it, Apple gives away software (almost dumps it on the market), in order to sell hardware. They did it when they bought and lowered the price on DVD Studio Pro. Suddenly Sound Jam became iTunes, the best, cheapest Mp3 software around at the time it came out. When it comes to backwards compatibility with older hardware, I think the furthest I've seen Apple reach, was rosetta. When they forced me to buy a new machine to run Leopard, I was mad, but in the end... they're not Microsoft, holding the weight of decades of compatibility on its shoulders.

Part of me can't help but accept that. Maybe I've got Kool-Aid in my cup. I'd like to think I don't.

~ CB

badmac78

Mar 18, 2009, 09:41 PM

Such handheld instrumentation (and more) has been around for years on Windows CE, DOS and proprietary OS devices.

For example, almost ten years ago I did a field application where a plugin test device communicated its results into a handheld.

Back in the beginning of what MS called Pocket PCs, most had a CF card slot, where you could plug in all sorts of interesting miniaturized sensors. Later they graduated to using Bluetooth connections.

As for the first "real" TriCorder, many consider that to have been Vital Technologies 1996 Mark I (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tricorder#.22Real.22_tricorders) :)

Yeah,
I've read about some of that stuff, but my point was that it's not just about the instrumentation, it's the fact that I now have a powerful enough computing device where the instrument is not the point. Plus, I'm not sure if I could fit a mass spectrometer in my pocket.

Having access to the accessory I think will drive some miniaturization of sensors that can be packaged together, i.e. glucose meter + heart rate monitor. Along with the EMF meter and other stuff.

How about an app that automatically pulls up a patients information when you are in proximity to them because you pick up their info via bluetooth from a tag they are wearing....

D3lta

Mar 18, 2009, 09:47 PM

Anyone else notice that Apple used 9:41AM instead of 9:42AM in the keynote?:cool:

MasterNile

Mar 18, 2009, 10:06 PM

No clue, but that would be an issue... Of course if exclusivity does end this year, maybe Verizon could get an iPhone ;)

Oh, I checked it out and according to this (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=535540) exclusivity doesn't end till 2010

TuffLuffJimmy

Mar 18, 2009, 10:07 PM

Oh, I checked it out and according to this (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=535540) exclusivity doesn't end till 2010

That's the best guess. No one really knows for sure what kind of contract the two companies have.

MasterNile

Mar 18, 2009, 10:09 PM

That's the best guess. No one really knows for sure what kind of contract the two companies have.

I was hoping it would end in 2009 :( but yeah it is a guess so I suppose it's possible it could end in 2009, but not with my luck.

Cleverboy

Mar 18, 2009, 10:55 PM

That's the best guess. No one really knows for sure what kind of contract the two companies have. Considering both Verizon and AT&T's LTE 4G implementations will likely be compatible, I'm thinking Apple will forgo dabbling into any CDMA compatible iPhone, regardless of its AT&T contracts.
http://www.engadget.com/2007/09/21/verizon-dumps-cdma-for-gsm-based-lte-in-4g-networks/
Just a few months removed from rumors that Vodafone would offload its stake in Verizon Wireless altogether, the two networks have announced that they'll share a common selection for their fourth-generation data networks: Long-Term Evolution. Endorsed by the 3GPP as the official way to burn wireless rubber in the next few years, LTE is a progression of GSM's UMTS platform, making it an ironic choice for CDMA stalwart Verizon and a huge blow for the CDMA Development Group's competing UMB standard.
Moreover, I'd heard that the AT&T exclusivity wasn't as long an arrangement as Apple's "no CDMA" in the U.S. pledge. This would allow them to hook up with T-Mobile sooner than Verizon or Sprint. As soon as Verizon starts its roll-out, we'll start getting an idea of when it will be useable coverage, AT&T won't be too far behind, but its a way for the tables to turn, I think.

Verizon Wireless to begin LTE rollout in Q4 2009?
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2008/12/10/verizon-to-begin-lte-rollout-in-q4-2009/
According to Dick Lynch, executive vice president and chief technology officer of Verizon Communications, Verizon Wireless is pushing up the timetable for its LTE rollout, aiming now for a late Q4 2009 deployment. Considering that Lynch said, “We expect that LTE will actually be in service somewhere here in the U.S. probably this time next year,” we can ascertain the initial deployment will be limited in scope and that the date is not set in stone. Nonetheless, such an aggressive timetable suggests that Verizon is trying to get a jump on their US competition and is keeping up with the likes of Japan’s NTT DoCoMo who recently announced that it expects to have LTE commercially available in 2010.
http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/02/17/att.on.4g.rollout/
The timetable puts AT&T's 4G network about a year behind that of Verizon, which is planning to trial its own LTE network late this year and to start its first regular service in 2010.

~ CB

automan98

Mar 18, 2009, 11:09 PM

The Media Event was two paths converging. Path 1: User features that are long overdue. Path 2: Awesome SDK to push the device ahead of the pack. In so many ways the iPhone is a leader, but in others areas it still lacks basic smartphone functionality. I switched from my iPhone back to a Blackberry. Today's announcements haven't made me change my mind.

TuffLuffJimmy

Mar 18, 2009, 11:10 PM

Considering both Verizon and AT&T's LTE 4G implementations will likely be compatible, I'm thinking Apple will forgo dabbling into any CDMA compatible iPhone, regardless of its AT&T contracts.
http://www.engadget.com/2007/09/21/verizon-dumps-cdma-for-gsm-based-lte-in-4g-networks/

Moreover, I'd heard that the AT&T exclusivity wasn't as long an arrangement as Apple's "no CDMA" in the U.S. pledge. This would allow them to hook up with T-Mobile sooner than Verizon or Sprint. As soon as Verizon starts its roll-out, we'll start getting an idea of when it will be useable coverage, AT&T won't be too far behind, but its a way for the tables to turn, I think.

Verizon Wireless to begin LTE rollout in Q4 2009?
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2008/12/10/verizon-to-begin-lte-rollout-in-q4-2009/

http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/02/17/att.on.4g.rollout/

~ CB

Did I say anywhere that I thought the iPhone would be coming to Verizon?

Mad Mac

Mar 18, 2009, 11:39 PM

Anybody know if we'll be able to play/pause/skip forward/skip backward with A2DP?

Cleverboy

Mar 19, 2009, 12:17 AM

Did I say anywhere that I thought the iPhone would be coming to Verizon? LOL. Did I say you did? Part of my post was regarding exclusivity agreements and what impact that might have on new Apple carrier agreements (whether its abstaining from CDMA for 5 years or AT&T exclusivity for 3 years). Is there some high offense in quoting you? Mad-on for Verizon? :p My post mentions multiple carriers.

~ CB

TuffLuffJimmy

Mar 19, 2009, 12:18 AM

LOL. Did I say you did? Part of my post was regarding exclusivity agreements and what that form that might take (whether its abstaining from CDMA for 5 years or AT&T exclusivity for 3 years). Is there some high offense in quoting you? :p

~ CB

It just looked like you were correcting me...

NT1440

Mar 19, 2009, 12:19 AM

It just looked like you were correcting me...

Think of it as using your post as a springboard so as not to look completely out of left field. I do it all the time.

eastercat

Mar 19, 2009, 12:53 AM

Like some of the other posters, I don't understand why some people are angry about the features that Apple announced.
Yes, they are features that are already present in other phones. If that is the case, why don't you own one of those phones instead? This is not a difficult solution.
For me, this phone meets most of what I want in a phone: e-mail, web surfing, iPod, etc.

The awesome:
Cut, copy and paste: This is the most exciting feature for me. While I don't need CCP, this will add to the functionality of the phone.
Notes sync: Another exciting feature for me. Notes is really useful and having a way to sync them is great for me.

The meh:
Tethering: so what if countries in Europe give free tethering? It's irrelevant to those who live in the USA. We will likely never get free tethering. If it surprises anyone that corporations are bastards, you obviously missed the story about AIG and the bonuses they're giving to their executives--with bailout money.
This just gives AT&T an excuse to charge $30-60/month. Meh.
MMS: This doesn't add functionality to the phone. I think texting is lame. What I find funny is that 1st gen iPhone users expect Apple to expend time and money to give them MMS. Please. Other people have pointed out that it's a ploy to induce you to buy a new phone.
If you don't like that solution, jailbreak and see if you can get Swirly to work on your phone.

The rest:
As for A2DP and the other features, I'll give them a try.

Features I'm glad they didn't include:
Video: I used to use cycorder, but the video was pretty bad. There are other phones that have video, why not buy them instead?
Voice dialing: This is my pet peeve. There have been a number of drivers who almost rammed into my car, because they weren't paying attention when they were changing lanes.
Studies have shown that hands free devices don't help when it comes to the inability of the driver to pay attention.
Nobody needs to talk while they're driving. People who drive and talk are a menace to other drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians. For real emergencies, you have the option to pull over. This is especially true for doctors, because driving takes away from one's concentration. I know I don't want my doctor to make medical decisions while s/he is maneuvering the highway.

Cleverboy

Mar 19, 2009, 12:56 AM

It just looked like you were correcting me...I keep staring at the abyss of starting under a new screen name. At times, no matter what my intention, it sounds like I'm being contrary and snotty. Sometimes I'm just talking about things I think are interesting, fishing for other perspectives and insight.

~ CB

kk1ro

Mar 19, 2009, 04:06 AM

The feature I'd kill for (and I'm talking as an iPod Touch 2G user) is the ability to connect the Touch to another BT enabled 3G phone (like my Nokia) and have internet access through the phone's 3G network.
After 3.0 was announced, I started regretting my decision to get a Touch + a Nokia 3G phone with all BT capabilities, MMS, 3.2MP photo/video camera, etc, instead of an iPhone.
This feature would keep me from buying the new iPhone that'll probably come out in June.

drlunanerd

Mar 19, 2009, 04:54 AM

Could someone please test iPhone OS 3.0 with the Apple In-Ear Headphones with Remote & Mic, the Apple Earphones with Remote & Mic and/or the new shuffle earphones?

I'd like to know if the volume controls now work on the iPhone :)

diamond.g

Mar 19, 2009, 06:13 AM

Features I'm glad they didn't include:
Video: I used to use cycorder, but the video was pretty bad. There are other phones that have video, why not buy them instead?

There is a post somewhere that points to engadget finding a way to upload video from the iPhone. So it could be possible that the next iPhone is going to allow video.

kdarling

Mar 19, 2009, 06:39 AM

Considering both Verizon and AT&T's LTE 4G implementations will likely be compatible, I'm thinking Apple will forgo dabbling into any CDMA compatible iPhone, regardless of its AT&T contracts.
http://www.engadget.com/2007/09/21/verizon-dumps-cdma-for-gsm-based-lte-in-4g-networks/

That 2007 article is both out of date and incorrect about "Verizon moving to GSM". LTE is neither GSM nor CDMA compatible. It's more like WiMAX in many ways.

As for being inter-carrier compatible, I think that unless Congress mandated it, ATT and Verizon are specifically going to make sure their devices can't be easily moved between them. It's not in their interest.

Verizon has also said they're planning on using LTE only for non-voice data at first, in laptops, homes, cars, etc. Their CDMA network will continue to be the voice carrier and will be around well into the next decade. ATT will probably do the same. In other words, an LTE phone could be rare for a while. (Subject to change.)

Finally, there's also the fact that an LTE phone will need, for at least five years to come, a way to fall back on the old method (CDMA or GSM) when you go out of LTE coverage, similar as is done now with 3G back to 2G. That would pretty well lock us into one carrier right there.

TheOrioles33

Mar 19, 2009, 07:53 AM

A near perfect update. The only thing I could ask for is a way to turn off the sudden motion sensor so that it doesn't flip around when laying down.

I agree 100%. It would be cool if there was a little lock icon in the corner that would let you lock whatever orientation you were in. Like you said, sometimes if your laying down or sideways the screen keeps flipping.

MistaBungle

Mar 19, 2009, 08:27 AM

I agree 100%. It would be cool if there was a little lock icon in the corner that would let you lock whatever orientation you were in. Like you said, sometimes if your laying down or sideways the screen keeps flipping.

Yep, hate that. But then I shake my head and tell myself 'you're displeased because the device is doing what it is supposed to. It can't read your mind'.

TheOrioles33

Mar 19, 2009, 08:50 AM

MMS: This doesn't add functionality to the phone. I think texting is lame.

I think the US sends SMS/MMS to the tune of over a BILLION a year. So I think there are a "few" people out there that would disagree with you.

TheOrioles33

Mar 19, 2009, 08:51 AM

It can't read your mind'.

Well it should! :)

MistaBungle

Mar 19, 2009, 08:54 AM

Well it should! :)

Sync with new Bluetooth Brain Activity monitor?????

Cleverboy

Mar 19, 2009, 09:31 AM

That 2007 article is both out of date and incorrect about "Verizon moving to GSM". LTE is neither GSM nor CDMA compatible. It's more like WiMAX in many ways. That sounds more reasonable. I think the idea was NOT the LTE was GSM or CDMA compatible. I'm not sure anyone said that (I don't think I did). The notion was that AT&T and Verizon's LTE implementations would be compatible with each other... which might lead to a unified iPhone hardware for the both of them.
As for being inter-carrier compatible, I think that unless Congress mandated it, ATT and Verizon are specifically going to make sure their devices can't be easily moved between them. It's not in their interest. Hence, getting Apple to refrain from making a CDMA device for 5 years. That's been the rumor I think. But, 5 years is up in 2012. Still a little wait I guess.
Verizon has also said they're planning on using LTE only for non-voice data at first, in laptops, homes, cars, etc. Their CDMA network will continue to be the voice carrier and will be around well into the next decade. ATT will probably do the same. In other words, an LTE phone could be rare for a while. (Subject to change.)

Finally, there's also the fact that an LTE phone will need, for at least five years to come, a way to fall back on the old method (CDMA or GSM) when you go out of LTE coverage, similar as is done now with 3G back to 2G. That would pretty well lock us into one carrier right there.
The unofficial Apple web log also had an inaccurate post about it in Feburary that they updated after feedback:
http://www.tuaw.com/2009/02/18/an-iphone-on-verizon-in-2010-with-lte-it-could-happen/
Commenters Andrew and Shane made a good point that I failed to grasp when I wrote this: Verizon's LTE implementation will not necessarily mean that GSM phones will work on Verizon's LTE network. LTE works like this: If you have an LTE chipset in your phone, awesome. If you don't, your phone will fall back to the network's prior 3G technology. In Verizon's case, that's still CDMA, which the iPhone doesn't support. Now, if Apple were to build in LTE support into their next round of iPhones (in anticipation of AT&T's adoption of the standard in 2011) there might be a chance this will still work, but that's a lot of ifs. That was the first I'd heard of anyone thinking LTE would make Verizon GSM compatible. The notion that they would need a "fallback" to the previous network does blow a whole in anything that's not able to do that. I just wonder if Apple would be capable of making one phone than does GSM, CDMA, and LTE without breaking a sweat. With some level of synergy on the forward looking standard, you'd expect anything was possible:

Qualcomm's new MSM6300 chipset allows GSM/CDMA roaming
http://www.mobileburn.com/news.jsp?Id=145
Qualcomm gets cozy with LTE, makes migrating from CDMA a snap
http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/08/qualcomm-gets-cozy-with-lte-makes-migrating-from-cdma-a-snap/

~ CB

Cleverboy

Mar 19, 2009, 09:38 AM

So the inability to get data while on the phone is supposed to be the entire reason for not allowing the 1G to get MMS? Again, so when the iPhone 3G isn't in 3G service does it still get MMS? You want to hear something strange... so, like I said earlier, I'd READ somewhere that Apple's MMS service wouldn't be available in non-3G areas. --Which just sounds awful. Made me wonder if I'd read wrong. Yet... look at Apple's press release.
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2009/03/17iphone.html
*MMS messaging is available only on iPhone 3G; fees may apply. MMS may not be available in all areas.
**Some features may not be supported by older hardware. Bingo. I don't think I can read that any other way. If they're implying that MMS is only available where "data" service is available (whether EDGE or 3G), I'd be surprised. If it's exposed that this is all a big lie, it will make the whole pricing change debacle look like Christmas by comparison. Interesting though... I just got a message update from iTunes. I've never received one like this.

~ CB

diamond.g

Mar 19, 2009, 09:48 AM

You want to hear something strange... so, like I said earlier, I'd READ somewhere that Apple's MMS service wouldn't be available in non-3G areas. --Which just sounds awful. Made me wonder if I'd read wrong. Yet... look at Apple's press release.
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2009/03/17iphone.html
Bingo. I don't think I can read that any other way. If they're implying that MMS is only available where "data" service is available (whether EDGE or 3G), I'd be surprised. If it's exposed that this is all a big lie, it will make the whole pricing change debacle look like Christmas by comparison. Interesting though... I just got a message update from iTunes. I've never received one like this.

~ CB

Interesting find. I have seen that update. It is a PRL (and probably other stuff) update.

zenrock

Mar 19, 2009, 11:03 AM

what do you mean the first gen iphone can't mms because of hardware it does it just fine in portugal and spain ask apple why it has a mms app in it's appstore there and allow it to work fine stop being sheep and and listen to apple's hype the first gen iphones can handle both mms under (swirlymms) and bluetooth stereo it does it now under jailbreak so why can't it under apple legit firmware who are they kidding.i not up grading to a new iphone after being ripped off the first time around and now they think if they refuse to add mms to the first gen i'll just get a new one they better think again ever hear of the (pre) later apple go ahead and refuse to add mms and bluetooth to the first iphone.

zenrock

Mar 19, 2009, 11:13 AM

That sounds more reasonable. I think the idea was NOT the LTE was GSM or CDMA compatible. I'm not sure anyone said that (I don't think I did). The notion was that AT&T and Verizon's LTE implementations would be compatible with each other... which might lead to a unified iPhone hardware for the both of them.
Hence, getting Apple to refrain from making a CDMA device for 5 years. That's been the rumor I think. But, 5 years is up in 2012. Still a little wait I guess.

The unofficial Apple web log also had an inaccurate post about it in Feburary that they updated after feedback:
http://www.tuaw.com/2009/02/18/an-iphone-on-verizon-in-2010-with-lte-it-could-happen/
That was the first I'd heard of anyone thinking LTE would make Verizon GSM compatible. The notion that they would need a "fallback" to the previous network does blow a whole in anything that's not able to do that. I just wonder if Apple would be capable of making one phone than does GSM, CDMA, and LTE without breaking a sweat. With some level of synergy on the forward looking standard, you'd expect anything was possible:

Qualcomm's new MSM6300 chipset allows GSM/CDMA roaming
http://www.mobileburn.com/news.jsp?Id=145
Qualcomm gets cozy with LTE, makes migrating from CDMA a snap
http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/08/qualcomm-gets-cozy-with-lte-makes-migrating-from-cdma-a-snap/

~ CB who said the iphone doesn't work on verizon do your homework before you say that mine's is working fine on their network screw at@t p.s i have mms hahahaha working on it first gen iphone now how did that happen hmmmm

zenrock

Mar 19, 2009, 11:21 AM

That 2007 article is both out of date and incorrect about "Verizon moving to GSM". LTE is neither GSM nor CDMA compatible. It's more like WiMAX in many ways.

As for being inter-carrier compatible, I think that unless Congress mandated it, ATT and Verizon are specifically going to make sure their devices can't be easily moved between them. It's not in their interest.

Verizon has also said they're planning on using LTE only for non-voice data at first, in laptops, homes, cars, etc. Their CDMA network will continue to be the voice carrier and will be around well into the next decade. ATT will probably do the same. In other words, an LTE phone could be rare for a while. (Subject to change.)

Finally, there's also the fact that an LTE phone will need, for at least five years to come, a way to fall back on the old method (CDMA or GSM) when you go out of LTE coverage, similar as is done now with 3G back to 2G. That would pretty well lock us into one carrier right there. the iphone does work on verizon don't let anyone tell you it doesn't when your contract ends take it to the local verizon store and tell them you want to add it on if you already have someone on verizon as a family plan it works just fine plus mms will be activated as part of your service.

diamond.g

Mar 19, 2009, 11:22 AM

who said the iphone doesn't work on verizon do your homework before you say that mine's is working fine on their network screw at@t p.s i have mms hahahaha working on it first gen iphone now how did that happen hmmmm

the iphone does work on verizon don't let anyone tell you it doesn't when your contract ends take it to the local verizon store and tell them you want to add it on if you already have someone on verizon as a family plan it works just fine plus mms will be activated as part of your service.Puff Puff pass man, puff puff pass...
:p

zenrock

Mar 19, 2009, 11:29 AM

zenrock

Mar 19, 2009, 11:37 AM

Puff Puff pass man, puff puff pass...
:pif you think so stay where you are then i not telling you to leave at@t but if your so upset about no mms in 3.0 for the first gen i'm telling you what's wrong i live on the eastcoast i'm telling you mine's is on verizon and i hate to tell you verizon is in europe under vodaphone and they have it there so if you wanna believe me or not i could careless i not stuck to at@t lol haha my wife and daughter have a blackberry storms and i have the iphone first gen on a family plan i have mms working on my iphone it's at@t that is blocking you guys from getting your service hate to say it.plus like i said i work at verizon and it was word that was not to be said until the 2yr iphone contracts with at@t were up.to the first gen iphone people if you wanna switch you can if you don't believe me go to your local verison store and askthem that you wanna and your bring iphone over to their service see what they say.

danedane5

Mar 19, 2009, 11:48 AM

Cant wait for the update!!! Just want video.. how much do you guys think a new version of the iphone would cost?

puffnstuff

Mar 19, 2009, 01:00 PM

Does anybody know if this (http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2008/11/iphone-2-2-sdk-offers-undocumented-tv-out-features.ars) is in the new sdk?

Cleverboy

Mar 19, 2009, 01:35 PM

Does anybody know if this (http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2008/11/iphone-2-2-sdk-offers-undocumented-tv-out-features.ars) is the new sdk? What I wouldn't give for someone to be able to push video out through Bluetooth to a small wireless device sitting on top of the TV. I'm not confident Bluetooth even has the bandwidth, but for iPod Touch (2G), iPhone, and iPhone 3G users... that would be a small victory for presenters and game enthusiasts now that they've unleashed full accessory customization.

~ CB

SkeffMBP

Mar 19, 2009, 01:43 PM

if you think so stay where you are then i not telling you to leave at@t but if your so upset about no mms in 3.0 for the first gen i'm telling you what's wrong i live on the eastcoast i'm telling you mine's is on verizon and i hate to tell you verizon is in europe under vodaphone and they have it there so if you wanna believe me or not i could careless i not stuck to at@t lol haha my wife and daughter have a blackberry storms and i have the iphone first gen on a family plan i have mms working on my iphone it's at@t that is blocking you guys from getting your service hate to say it.plus like i said i work at verizon and it was word that was not to be said until the 2yr iphone contracts with at@t were up.to the first gen iphone people if you wanna switch you can if you don't believe me go to your local verison store and askthem that you wanna and your bring iphone over to their service see what they say.

:eek::confused:

My brain hurts now.

goosnarrggh

Mar 19, 2009, 02:10 PM

meaningless stream of words

Frankly, it really doesn't matter one iota whether you're right or wrong about any of this: If you don't make an attempt to organize your thoughts into meaningful sentences, nobody's going to take anything you have to say seriously.

TuffLuffJimmy

Mar 19, 2009, 02:33 PM

NT1440

Mar 19, 2009, 02:34 PM

Quoted for truth!
:D:D
Can I nominate this for post of the year?

Nope, i see no post there, just a wall of jumbled together text. I really wish people would learn how to use paragraphs, or even line breaks!

TuffLuffJimmy

Mar 19, 2009, 02:40 PM

Nope, i see no post there, just a wall of jumbled together text. I really wish people would learn how to use paragraphs, or even line breaks!

If you try and read it it's even funnier. The poster doesn't know how to form even basic sentences...

McGiord

Mar 19, 2009, 03:09 PM

MMS = fax :D

Video VoiceMail will be the new "Visual VoiceMail".

All carriers are the same piece of sh$t...

MasterNile

Mar 19, 2009, 03:23 PM

Does anybody know if this (http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2008/11/iphone-2-2-sdk-offers-undocumented-tv-out-features.ars) is the new sdk?

How can that be the new SDK, it is from 11/2008 and says 2.2 SDK, the new one is 3.0 SDK, the video out capability is in the current build of the iPhone/iPod Touch firmware, and if you jailbreak it you can output any app over video out.

Cleverboy

Mar 19, 2009, 03:51 PM

How can that be the new SDK, it is from 11/2008 and says 2.2 SDK, the new one is 3.0 SDK, the video out capability is in the current build of the iPhone/iPod Touch firmware, and if you jailbreak it you can output any app over video out. I'm thinking he meant, "if this is IN the new sdk". Because this class was obtained from a framework dump and is an undocumented feature, the concern is that it will simply vanish during an update. Hopefully the CoverFlow class is IN the new sdk for 3.0 too. 1000 new things. Lots of room for some snazzy things to be there. Can't wait for someone to risk violating their NDA by passing their SDK to a non-developer who can freely expound upon it publicly without waiting until June (at which point the normal freedoms... the new ones... should kick in).

~ CB

MasterNile

Mar 19, 2009, 03:55 PM

I'm thinking he meant, "if this is IN the new sdk". Because this class was obtained from a framework dump and is an undocumented feature, the concern is that it will simply vanish during an update. Hopefully the CoverFlow class is IN the new sdk for 3.0 too. 1000 new things. Lots of room for some snazzy things to be there. Can't wait for someone to risk violating their NDA by passing their SDK to a non-developer who can freely expound upon it publicly without waiting until June (at which point the normal freedoms... the new ones... should kick in).

~ CB

Yeah that makes more sense, but the lack of that 2 letter word makes the statement completely different. So I figured if that's what he meant he would correct it after I made my post.

seedster2

Mar 19, 2009, 06:25 PM

As an enterprise user I am disappointed that they still have not added support for multiple email signatures.

Hopefully it will be present in the final release.

TuffLuffJimmy

Mar 19, 2009, 06:31 PM

As an enterprise user I am disappointed that they still have not added support for multiple email signatures.

Hopefully it will be present in the final release.

yes, and as a teenage user I don't like that they don't support embedding emoji in email. They should, that way the little icons will show up on computers and other email supporting phones.

D4F

Mar 19, 2009, 07:24 PM

That's pretty cool.
:rolleyes:

iPhone gets features that should be there from day 1. What a great advancement to the iPhone. Stevie is such a visionaire...

puffnstuff

Mar 19, 2009, 07:31 PM

Yeah that makes more sense, but the lack of that 2 letter word makes the statement completely different. So I figured if that's what he meant he would correct it after I made my post.

opps yea I f'd up

I meant

is the ability to output apps through video out in the new sdk

Cleverboy

Mar 19, 2009, 08:41 PM

As an enterprise user I am disappointed that they still have not added support for multiple email signatures. Hopefully it will be present in the final release.I think a "unified inbox" is another high priority for an upcoming revision. I suspect that now that they have "selection" and "copy/paste" controls for text, they can afford to add "rich text" options to signatures as well. Bold, italic, text color, embedded logos, etc.yes, and as a teenage user I don't like that they don't support embedding emoji in email. They should, that way the little icons will show up on computers and other email supporting phones. I'm ecstatic about the fact that they're adding support for "data detectors", so that "dates" or "locations" can be automatically recognized and linked to other applications or utilities (like in Leopard's Apple Mail).

I think Emoji would likely be a part of that whole level of consideration, as VERY often smiley faces show up where they're not wanted... in basic implementations. Turning the feature on and off would help, but conflicts shouldn't be too irksome in any case.That's pretty cool.
:rolleyes: iPhone gets features that should be there from day 1. What a great advancement to the iPhone. Stevie is such a visionaire... I'm especially glad that the iPhone OS will be a platform that doesn't arbitrarily "lose" features moving forward (the exception being carriers that don't support a carrier dependent feature like Visual Voicemail). I think its great the Pre gets to ride the iPhone's coattails in getting certain features "on day one" (like a nice WebKit browser Apple has contributed heavily towards advancing). Verizon folks are still wondering whether they're going to be able to use their Blackberry GPS' on anything other than VZNavigator, while the iPhone's released a whole framework for multifarious GPS and location services. If Apple offers geocoding capabilities I'm going to be pleased as punch.

It's definitely taken a while for the iPhone to cover the landscape of features smart phones have been piece mealing into sets for years... but the wonderful distinction is that Apple has created a one-stop-shop that they tend towards not allowing carriers to arbitrarily fracture. As a former Sprint/Nextel user who had a calculator in one phone, and upgraded, only to have to PAY for a calculator in his supposed "advanced" new phone... that means something to me.

1000 new APIs. I mean... yikes. Going forward, I can guarantee there will be more and more talk of "monopoly" and less talk of "Apple hype" and "lack of features". I predict the HOTTEST sore spot will be all the 3rd party accessories that the iPhone will connect to through its proprietary 30 pin connector.

I'm hoping that if devices begin supporting Bonjour Bluetooth wireless connections in any wide capacity, that there will be an industry standard formed to push it forward as something many device OS' can utilize (Android, WinMo, Blackberry, etc).

~ CB

butterfly0fdoom

Mar 20, 2009, 01:19 AM

As for being inter-carrier compatible, I think that unless Congress mandated it, ATT and Verizon are specifically going to make sure their devices can't be easily moved between them. It's not in their interest.

Unlocked AT&T phones can be used on T-Mobile. Whether or not AT&T and Verizon LTE phones can be used on the other's network depends on whether or not LTE requires SIM cards and if Verizon adopts SIM cards if the usage is optional.

slabbius

Mar 20, 2009, 02:03 AM

I posted this on engadget and figured I would post it here as well:

As a developer, I feel that 3.0 is usable, yet sluggish at times. The amount of new APIs is truly amazing and opens up many new doors. Transitioning from an app (native or third party) to the home screen feels sluggish at times. I have also noticed that the status bar across the top seems to get "stuck" on the side periodically when in landscape mode, mainly in Notes. E-mailing pictures from the photo albums seem to have a bit of lag as well. I have already experienced a "lock-up" of sorts after using the Facebook app. It seems that I was stuck in the Phone app and could only switch to Messages if I looked at a contact's info and clicked on Text Message, otherwise I was not able to return to the home screen and required cycling of the power. Sliding from the Home screen to the Search/Finder feels a bit sluggish as well as the actual search itself, but I assume this will be streamlined before going live. Copy and paste seems to work beautifully, but when trying to move the cursor in the Messages app, it seems to want to always select text instead of moving the cursor. I am unsure if this is a localized problem or if other may be experiencing the same.

I am very fond of the updated Recent Calls list, as it now shows locations as well as durations of each call. I also enjoy how the Camera app now shows a thumbnail in the lower left corner of the last picture taken. Typing in landscape mode is a blessing and feels much more natural than the portrait keyboard layout, although there is not (currently) support for landscape mode in the Calendar app. This slightly disappoints me since all other apps work seamlessly with landscape mode, with the exceptions I have mentioned and I feel that I input dates into the Calendar app more often than I use iCal since I am always on the go.

Hope this helps someone :)

kdarling

Mar 20, 2009, 06:40 AM

Whether or not AT&T and Verizon LTE phones can be used on the other's network depends on whether or not LTE requires SIM cards and if Verizon adopts SIM cards if the usage is optional.

LTE is just the basis for a 4G network. It doesn't define the details.

Since Verizon is driving the LTE standard in the USA at this point, it's very doubtful that they'll use SIMs. Vodafone might though. And ATT might.

However, that's assuming there are LTE phones. Again, LTE is seen by Verizon as a way for many common devices to gain broadband connections without WiFi... not to be used for voice. They intend to continue using CDMA for that.

The latest Verizon LTE vision (Feb 09) can be read here (http://news.vzw.com/LTE/Dick_Lynch_MWC_Final.pdf).

pooryou

Mar 20, 2009, 06:49 AM

Really? What does iPhone v1.0 do that no other phone does?

It doesn't suck.

Cleverboy

Mar 20, 2009, 07:09 AM

Unlocked AT&T phones can be used on T-Mobile. Whether or not AT&T and Verizon LTE phones can be used on the other's network depends on whether or not LTE requires SIM cards and if Verizon adopts SIM cards if the usage is optional. I'd agree with kdarling... that the carriers... unless mandated by congress, might very well do everything in their power to maintain physical exclusivity for each device. It's my belief however, that by the time we get to 2012, and LTE is out in force, Apple won't need to launch ANY exclusivity agreements to maintain customer interest. Verizon has "pledged" that "any device" can be activated on their network... and yet, AT&T with GSM is the only one of the two that doesn't need to explicitly "enable" devices for its customers.

Worse, Verizon has a practice of "disabling" features (http://jkontherun.com/2007/07/01/verizon-gets-me/), like the GPS (http://forums.crackberry.com/f61/class-action-lawsuit-against-verizon-failure-offer-gps-4074/), unless you're using its own applications (http://www.cyberlawonline.com/cyberlawg/general-interest/suit-challenges-verizon-on-blackberry-gps.html). --This could prove a problem for a device like the iPhone, were it at some point CDMA compatible. If Apple chose to make one phone that worked on each of the different networks, it would be a remarkable accomplishment... yet if Verizon chooses not to enable it... it could be a public relations debacle on BOTH sides.

--Verizon is NOT COOL with many aspects of the iPhone that undermine its network properties. GPS for its VZNavigator, WiFi for its EV-DO, and iTunes for its VCast service (some of these were show stoppers for early negotiations). Nevermind the carrier's need to work WITH Apple on Visual Voicemail, I'd imagine simply supporting Verizon's LTE implementation (whether a different SIM card type, or some SIM-less method) would be the least of the challenges. By giving people a great service and many features that sit on the fringe of what customers expect, Verizon has lulled customers into a sense of security that they are all for openness (http://www.circleid.com/posts/711284_verizon_open_wireless/) and customer value.

http://gizmodo.com/369961/verizons-open+door-policy-what-it-actually-means
After all, GSM operators like AT&T and T-Mobile have always had a degree of openness. Verizon is in a way just catching up. I guess we'll see what happens if a device on the calibre of the iPhone ever hits our plates... what degree of "openness" Verizon will be interested in. Odds are, we consumers will only hear about why it didn't work out, through backroom rumors.

~ CB

kdarling

Mar 20, 2009, 08:18 AM

Verizon doesn't disable anything on its smartphones, except the access to GPS (which is changing now, and many people unlock it with hacked ROMs anyway).

This is partly because no one else even had GPS in their phones for a long time, and Verizon mainly had it for E911 accuracy. (ATT used far less accurate cell tower location for E911. This is changing too, now that requirements are tightening.) VZNavigator was kind of an afterthought that worked out.

Also, Verizon had expected to sell LBS (location based services) and that idea is taking a little while to go away. I expect within a year or so, there'll be no more GPS locking.

Apple, in comparison, has had the iPhone locked up tighter than ANYTHING Verizon would do... especially until recently. No apps allowed from anyone but Apple, no alternative browsers, no decent Bluetooth profiles until 3.0 (and still not great), and legal moves to block jailbreaking.

Not to mention Apple's original idea that they would receive monthly royalties from all their iPhone customers, by stealing their subsidy money.

So neither party is free of "locking". It's especially ironic that Verizon still is remembered for leaving out Bluetooth tethering/etc in one or two dumbphones years ago, yet Apple has taken years to enable even a few more Bluetooth profiles.

kas23

Mar 20, 2009, 09:28 AM

Cool. MMS. Where are all those fanboy tools now that said there would never be MMS and how it was an old technology and Apple is just being a trailblazer?

Cleverboy

Mar 20, 2009, 11:04 AM

Verizon doesn't disable anything on its smartphones, except the access to GPS (which is changing now, and many people unlock it with hacked ROMs anyway). That's kind of a big "except". If you can find location-aware applications other than Google Maps running consistently across Verizon phones, that would be useful information. In one of the links I provided, the writer was lamenting that Verizon "disabled" his Bluetooth as well. I mean, read this complaint from the BoyGeniusReport (Feb 18, 2009):
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2009/02/18/google-maps-now-supports-gps-on-verizon-blackberry-storm/comment-page-1/
Google has just released an updated version of Google Maps for BlackBerry which supports GPS right out of the box, and it also includes Latitude so you can get your stalking on. Of note: Google politely told any other Verizon BlackBerry user (Curve 8330, 8830) to go screw themselves since the Storm is the only device with a third party-accessable GPS chip. For any other BlackBerry addict, don’t get too excited as this isn’t a new release of Google Maps for you, it’s just bringing the Storm handsets up to date with what you already had. It sounds like you're drinking Verizon's kool-aid if you're just "excepting" this as a temporary short-coming (pun intended). In reality, its stupid and unacceptable and they need to move quickly to reposition themselves.
This is partly because no one else even had GPS in their phones for a long time, and Verizon mainly had it for E911 accuracy. If this were an excuse for Apple, I'd roll my eyes just as hard. GPS has been on phones for a WHILE now. The first instinct was to use it to push a carrier specific service (like AT&T also did). --Things like Google Maps have made it clear that this whole idea needs to be re-examined. While Verizon wanted Apple to accept VCast and VZNavigator, Apple got concessions from AT&T on that front and used that to push its way into other carriers with the same terms. This is an important fact regarding these "gate keepers".
Also, Verizon had expected to sell LBS (location based services) and that idea is taking a little while to go away. Again, this is a very understandable excuse. Right now, my "not accepting" this, is part of the consumer pressure they NEED to be feeling. How many "location based" apps are in the App Store right now? Urban Spoon. Where. Jogging apps. Social networking. Some really nice... FREE... stuff out there. That Verizon is playing catch up should be FRONT and CENTER, not swept under the rug as a penance for coming early to the game with the wrong concept. That's been some of Microsoft's greatest sins, and why Apple often holds back before getting itself involved in a market that falls apart while it tries to gain footing (like putting early cable cards into AppleTVs, that would have been painful).
Apple, in comparison, has had the iPhone locked up tighter than ANYTHING Verizon would do... especially until recently. No apps allowed from anyone but Apple, no alternative browsers, no decent Bluetooth profiles until 3.0 (and still not great), and legal moves to block jailbreaking. Meh. Here's what I understand about what Apple is doing. Apple is TRYING... TRYING to protect the user experience. There are some things they're doing that smack of financial protectionism, but others that I think are legitimate attempts to foment some consistency. It's THEIR platform, THEY have to deal with the fall out of anything that happens on it. I think not supporting Bluetooth keyboards... is frankly protectionism. They don't want the iPhone to turn into a laptop/netbook thing. That... I can overlook.

Other things like protecting "Fair Play" and staying in good graces with content holders stops them from going nutty with media file management. A2DP, I think has been a quality and consistency issue. They snuck Bluetooth into the 2G iPod Touch, and now that they've finished developing stereo support, they're adding it across the platform and coupling it with other wireless networking goodies. Overall Bluetooth file transfer profiles don't serve much purpose without a universal file system, and Apple has been curious quiet on that end... letting software like AirShare and Files step in to fill the void for taking a viewing files on the go. Business cards? First they linked vCard attachments in email (big step) to the contact app, now they've hot linked it even more, and predictably are adding data detectors to link written addresses to Google Maps. This is excellent, and not the dead-end "no movement / change the subject" behavior some others have taken in the space.

Not to start a "jailbreaking" versus "non--jailbreaking" argument, but I have a hard time paying attention to what was once my favorite iPhone podcast due to this snotty notion that somehow jail-breaking makes your phone "amazing" or "useful". It's HACKING. It's FUN. But, seriously... only gadget enthusiasts can honestly call it anything but fooling around.

Even before Apple published its SDK, the jailbreaker programmers like Erica Sadun were noting that it was clear they were headed in this direction. Apple has now added 1000 MORE APIs with version 3.0, and is effectively doing more than most other mobile OS's... simply because it has been steadily working on a cohesive approach. The security problems on the initial iPhone were HUGE. By 2.0 they'd fixed them enough to open up the device, and by 3.0 they're opening it up more.

There's still stuff on the MacOS that has to be "hacked" to modify. That's why the Application Enhancer exists. Personally, using undocumented APIs and hacking things up gets messy. Seems to me Apple is trying to release features and updates in a way that they can actually SUPPORT, and not just throwing features into a one-off device that they'll pledge to get right "next time".

Look at WinMo...
http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/18/editorial-ten-reasons-why-windows-mobile-6-5-misses-the-mark/
Microsoft is excluding phones from updates simply because they lack a labelled "start flag" button. There are SO many versions of Windows Mobile phones out there, with features supported on some hardware but not on others, some networks, but not on others... its humorous to me that when Apple comes out with ONE PHONE that generally has all of its features available on all of its supported networks, suddenly they're the "bad guy".

Microsoft announces its own App Store, and quickly adopts the SAME principles Apple took... 70/30 split with developers, $99 per year... but quickly limits each developer to 5 apps per $99 fee. Others are following suit. Why did it take Apple's approach to get this type of ease-of-use issue rolling? Moreover, will ALL these other phones/platforms catch up quickly to Apple's accessory market avenues? Sadly... NO. This is going to be a serious battleground moving forward.

Not to mention Apple's original idea that they would receive monthly royalties from all their iPhone customers, by stealing their subsidy money. You're a riot. Apple didn't release a subsidized phone initially for a number of reasons. How much was the Razor when it FIRST debuted? How much was it a year later? I think they managed demand very well on their first outing, and are priced extremely well right now... especially considering its other non-phone product.
So neither party is free of "locking". It's especially ironic that Verizon still is remembered for leaving out Bluetooth tethering/etc in one or two dumbphones years ago, yet Apple has taken years to enable even a few more Bluetooth profiles. The great thing is that once Apple enables tethering, it will only "vanish" if the network takes it away as a service (which is their right). Apple has done SO much "in software", without proprietary chips that may or may not make it into subsequent handsets, they've made themselves into a monster.

Until Apple came along, Nokia thrived on differentiating its phones by deciding which types of customers needed which types of features. Now, people will be looking at every other phone, and wondering why features vanish and return between various handset lines, while the iPhone continues to "accumulate" features in its OS and hardware that developers can count on to make extremely "sticky" and hardware agnostic applications.

~ CB

macdragonfl

Mar 22, 2009, 10:31 AM

What I wouldn't give for someone to be able to push video out through Bluetooth to a small wireless device sitting on top of the TV. I'm not confident Bluetooth even has the bandwidth, but for iPod Touch (2G), iPhone, and iPhone 3G users... that would be a small victory for presenters and game enthusiasts now that they've unleashed full accessory customization.

~ CB

Of course if it came out tomorrow, it would be in iphone os 6 or 7 as it took 3.0 to get stereo bluetooth! It's such a shame as many phones had before the original iphone was released. Never could understand that as it is a music phone.

palmerc2

Mar 22, 2009, 10:42 PM

hope the new iPhone has a much better battery.

Right now on my 3G all i have activated is the 3G and Wifi (I turn it off when i need to save battery though). And pretty soon I am also going to use bluetooth, yet another power sucking device.

In the new update, with push notifications, battery will decrease by another 25% (I think that was the number given)

Wifi + 3G + Bluetooth + Push Notifications = iPhone battery death, 5 hrs max, with 30 minutes of talk time in mind....

Cleverboy

Mar 23, 2009, 07:06 AM

Of course if it came out tomorrow, it would be in iphone os 6 or 7 as it took 3.0 to get stereo bluetooth! It's such a shame as many phones had before the original iphone was released. Never could understand that as it is a music phone. As I hear it, Jobs tends to snub implementing technologies that are a little ahead of themselves in terms of the quality of user experience (or in the case of Bluetooth, something who's licensing represents "a bag of hurt"). If you blink and look again, apparently, A2DP will NOT be supported on the original iPhone either with the 3.0 update, due to "hardware issues". This is why its possible that video will NEVER come to the iPhone and iPhone 3G, and instead be reserved for the new model of iPhone (alongside its newer, more capable hardware).

Most phones have historically taken an "I did it, now leave me alone" approach to supporting different hardware and/or software solutions. They'd implement crappy voice command software, buggy A2DP support, unnervingly useless media player support... meanwhile, the biggest frustration with the iPhone isn't that it didn't provide enough value for people to want it, but that it did SO many things SO well, that people wanted the iPhone to hit every corner of the mobile landscape from its inception with the same level of excellence (which was impossible, or someone else would have did it).

Realistically, how does that work for competitors? Look at the Helio Ocean. Remember how much it was compared to the iPhone and said to be a "killer"? Well, guess what? It wasn't. It continues to be an also-ran, proprietary, no-3rd party app having, compromised eco-system.

HELIO OCEAN - besting the iPHONE 24/7
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=329599
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=536224

Why is it that iPhone is supposedly so "behind", while people are claiming now to be waiting for the Palm Pre as the new iPhone killer? It continues to be wildly out of step for anyone to ONLY look at the features Apple did NOT provide, and pretend as if it hasn't eclipsed other devices on many features they DID NOT provide, or did very poorly.

This isn't a perfect world. Sometimes you have to make a choice between doing 6 important things well, or doing 10 semi-important things poorly. I think Apple's choice in this area will be paying dividends for a looooong time to come. People will stop the chatter over "missing features" in about a year, and start talking about Apple cornering the market and not letting other phone manufacturers tap its growing infrastructure and momentum (accessory market, iTunes, etc).

I remember some time ago trying to put together a list of all the main iPhone competitors at the time. The list is populated by such of parade of irrelevant devices, its embarrassing to think how close these things once seemed on paper (especially the ones that never quite showed up in the market). Anyone remember hearing about the "Deeda Pi"?

http://www.myphonewar.com/iphone-competitors.php

~ CB