Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

avigalante

macrumors 6502
Feb 18, 2007
425
16
New York City
I agree with the general sentiment that the 2.5G EDGE iPhone will be done away with. I wish there were some people working on some mockups... with that said, what's general consensus on the form factor (same as before, slimmer, [insert your mind blowing wish here], etc...)?
 

0098386

Suspended
Jan 18, 2005
21,574
2,908
Chances are the 2.5G phone will just be sold off at a much lower price point. If the only thing we get at the update is 3G then I might just grab a cheaper 2.5G phone.

Conservatively I think we're just looking at an internally redesigned phone which can hold 2x16gb chips max and 3G.

Though part of me thinks we might see GPS (since Apple has expressed interest in location tech), OLED for longer battery life, front facing camera to make use of that 3G radio, higher capacity battery to balance out 3G.
 

mortlar

macrumors newbie
Apr 7, 2008
8
0
Just a thought

I keep thinking about this double camera "thingy". I'm not too keen on it. It's just a shot in the dark really, but what I would love is a "cheapo" small screen at the back of the phone. The main display could go dark or something when using the screen on the back (or not, I don't care)

Wouldn't that be a lot better?

1 For video calls you could use the main camera (and wouldn't need two ugly holes in the phone) You can just watch the caller on the small screen

2 For taking a picture of yourself (or anyone else) it shows the person how the image will look.

3 You can use it for putting on make up! :p

4 Wouldn't it be cheaper, use less space, be prettier and more inovative? Several phones already have two screens, so it can't be all that bad.

5 The screen can, of course, show the apple logo when not in use (with animations, or other stuff if apple would like that)

6 Perhaps it could function as a flash? (like the screen on the mp(p) with photobooth)

Just wishful thinking though.
Anybody object to my point of view?
 

0098386

Suspended
Jan 18, 2005
21,574
2,908
Rather than putting a concealed, small camera under the glass on the front of the iPhone you want to put another screen on the back? Can't see that happening! Be weird having a video conversation with the arse end of a phone.
 

inkswamp

macrumors 68030
Jan 26, 2003
2,953
1,278
You didn't say you wish them to be every 6 months apart, you said that once a year sucks.
244 days != 365 days
3 seasons != 4 seasons
9 moons ago != 12 moons ago

First off, let's look at the bigger context. I see this stuff as someone who has followed Apple pretty closely for the last 10+ years and I guess I expect others to attempt to see it in that context too, not isolate it to only the last year.

Apple's update cycle for computers, especially the consumer-level stuff has dropped off sharply while all their activity lately seems focused primarily on the iPhone and to a lesser extent, the iPod. To me, after having gone through the old days of frequent updates and seeing that drop off to 11 months at a time, well... that's close enough to a year from my viewpoint. If you want to split hairs, fine, but there's no denying that Apple appears to be shifting into a yearly update cycle.

Second, you're downplaying what I'm saying by using only the current cycle. The previous update was close to a year. As it stands, the iMac and the Mini are 9 months past their last updates. A few years ago, that would have been unthinkable. We would have seen a price drop or a specs bump around 4-5 months and would be talking about what's coming up next month or sooner. Nowadays, nothing.

Third, I think it's pretty safe to say that Apple likely won't be updating the iMac or Mini until late summer or later. If they've waited this long, what's the rush? And from what I see, the two are probably selling well enough.

It's unfortunate that Apple is going to let the computers lag at a time when consumers are really interested in Apple's machines. They should be trying to blow people's minds with the consumer-level stuff, but it's just withering on the vine.
 

mortlar

macrumors newbie
Apr 7, 2008
8
0
Rather than putting a concealed, small camera under the glass on the front of the iPhone you want to put another screen on the back? Can't see that happening! Be weird having a video conversation with the arse end of a phone.

Video conversation is wierd anyway. Crappy quality, and totally useless imho. Just like MMS in Scandinavia.People use it despite it being useless. I don't believe apple will care for video coversation, but this would at least make it possible. Just a thought, and I see the same drawback as you.

I would just love to have the apple logo on a display with all the posibilities it gives.
 

0098386

Suspended
Jan 18, 2005
21,574
2,908
But every Apple computer on the market (barring the Mac Mini and MacPro) now has a front facing web cam for iChat. Apple obviously see the importance of this. I've never bothered with video chat myself but every 3G phone on the market here has a front facing webcam, or a swivel-cam thing. They're only usually cheap VGA quality cams.
 

mortlar

macrumors newbie
Apr 7, 2008
8
0
Then perhaps only a front facing camera, or a flip-phone. But i doubt the flip-idea. You could have a front facing camera, and a small screen on the back for viewing the stuff you are trying to shoot. With the front display as a blitz. But i think I'm starting to get way of track here. I would like it, but it's not very apple anyway. They like it simple and pretty...
 

joeshell383

macrumors 6502a
Sep 18, 2006
792
0
Then perhaps only a front facing camera, or a flip-phone. But i doubt the flip-idea. You could have a front facing camera, and a small screen on the back for viewing the stuff you are trying to shoot. With the front display as a blitz. But i think I'm starting to get way of track here. I would like it, but it's not very apple anyway. They like it simple and pretty...

What you're saying doesn't make sense. Why would you want a screen on the back? The back camera is to be used as a traditional camera. The front camera would be for video chat and self portraits. It's that simple- all your ideas for a back screen are the reasons why we want a front camera (which would utilize the large 3.5" touch screen as a preview display...)

If Apple did a flip model, then who knows, but for the current model it doesn't really make any sense.
 

Manic Mouse

macrumors 6502a
Jul 12, 2006
943
0
Then perhaps only a front facing camera, or a flip-phone. But i doubt the flip-idea. You could have a front facing camera, and a small screen on the back for viewing the stuff you are trying to shoot. With the front display as a blitz. But i think I'm starting to get way of track here. I would like it, but it's not very apple anyway. They like it simple and pretty...

What is this obsession with two screens about? It would cost way more than it's worth, when a cheap front-facing VGA cam will do the job.
 

indie1982

macrumors newbie
Jun 26, 2007
22
3
The Chinese factories could be sitting on pre-made 3G iPhones waiting for the FCC ID info for the laser etching with shipments starting within a week of the approval.

I really doubt it, I don't think they would risk manufacturing millions before it has FCC approval. What if the FCC come back and say something has to be changed?
 

bobbleheadbob

macrumors 6502a
Feb 6, 2007
653
0
Massachusetts
The next version of the iPhone (3G, 2.0, whatever you want to call it) has to already be in the works and is probably with the FCC. I'd expect a regulatory filing to leak sometime in late April or May and the phone to be available sometime in June to coincide with the next major :apple: software update.

Can't wait! :D
 

rjflyn

macrumors regular
Jun 15, 2007
187
29
No one here must spend much time at phonesoop.com. Phones get announced there all the time and then when you start looking, the FCC approval date often is after. So yes unless you want them shooting your wad you need to have your ducks in a row.

That said I can hardly imagine the 3G iPhone not needing approval or using a pre-approved radio. Steve even came right out and told us a year ago the reason the phone was not 3G already was that the chips currently out were too power hungry. The other thing is we all know our government is full of red tape and it would not be to hard for said paperwork to conveniently get lost for a few weeks. :rolleyes:

rj
 

macFanDave

macrumors 6502a
Apr 14, 2003
571
0
Don't look to the FCC for consistency, logic, fairness.

With the 3 Republican chairmen of the FCC, the agency has become the little bitch of corporate America, and has long since ditched its duty to making sure our airwaves are used for the public good. Congress is even having to step in when the FCC makes rules contrary to the overwhelming public will.

Fortunately, in this case, the corporate giant in question is our beloved, beneficent Apple, so they will be able to get the 3G iPhone out whenever they damn well please. The best time, in my book, would be to release it as soon as the AppStore opens for business.

Kopps and Edelman, you guys rock! I really appreciate what you do for us! Hang in there -- when we take back the White House, you will get a colleague that will let you restore the FCC to its true mission.
 

TBRO

macrumors newbie
Oct 17, 2007
10
0
Apple will not announce this phone before it is available. They will announce it and it will be available the next day. Here's why:
1) Walt Mossberg's statement
2) If they need to apply to the FCC (might not be necessary because pre-approved 3G chips exist), they'll do it 6 weeks before WWDC, simple, easy way to make sure it stays quiet on the FCC's end. So by the time it's released by the FCC, it'll be announced and available the next day.
3) So they sell as many iPhones as possible. They want to keep selling 2.5G iPhones until the day before they officially announce the 3G phone. (This wasn't necessary for the first iPhone because there was no previous iPhone.)

Apple can easily keep the info quiet on the FCC's end. I'm sure they're pissed about Walt's comment but what's done is done. In my opinion they don't want people knowing an exact date due to extremely decreased iPhone sales leading up to the 3G version.

Exactly! Was gonna say the exact same thing, but you said it so much better! ;)
 

rockstarjoe

macrumors 6502a
Jun 2, 2006
875
76
washington dc
Testing

With regard to testing the iPhone in house by Apple before submitting to the FCC, this may be relevant information:

"To ensure the iPhone's tiny antenna could do its job effectively, Apple spent millions buying and assembling special robot-equipped testing rooms. To make sure the iPhone didn't generate too much radiation, Apple built models of human heads — complete with goo to simulate brain density — and measured the effects. To predict the iPhone's performance on a network, Apple engineers bought nearly a dozen server-sized radio-frequency simulators for millions of dollars apiece."

The "robot-equipped testing rooms," from what I've heard, are the same as the ones used by the FCC.

http://www.wired.com/gadgets/wireless/magazine/16-02/ff_iphone?currentPage=3
 

sleepingworker

macrumors 6502a
Feb 26, 2003
579
0
Manhattan, NY
Then again Mossberg seems to believes it'll be here "within 60 days" so does that mean Apple *might* not announce it at WWDC but rather make an announcement in the coming weeks and say it'll be available during or after WWDC. I think it might make more sense to have it actually be available for purchase while the press covers WWDC but at the same time I can't see Apple coming out of the blue with "hey, by the way, new iPhone is coming in June."


Oh well, either way by July I should have a brand new phone. ;)

When Mossberg said "60 days" I took it as meaning that it will be announced to the public at WWDC. So I expect that the iPhone will be available for sale either towards the end of June or early July.
 

SirOmega

macrumors 6502a
Apr 17, 2006
715
6
Las Vegas
One final thing to note, if Apple announces at WWDC and has a 6 week lead time, they'll be spreading the iPhone sales drought across two quarters, which helps financially - you can blame any poor sales on the last few week of the Q because everyone is waiting for the new phone and then in the new quarter you get great sales numbers from people buying the phone.
 

frank781

macrumors member
Jul 22, 2002
33
0
Mexico
Apple should've filed already

To clarify, on 17 May 2007 the FCC approved the iPhone but Apple had requested a 45 day period of silence on the FCC's part beginning with the day of approval. Just read the letters in the link:
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/...ame=N&application_id=268052&fcc_id='BCGA1203'

Based on this excellent analysis, Apple should've filed for FCC approval in the llast 2 weeks to get the maximum confidentiality and launch on time by late JUne (June 27th ?) if all the rumours are correct.

If they've already filed, then an announcement could come in May (around the 13th or 20th) with a possible drop in price in the current models as well to maintain sales with that model.

By the way, the current shortage of iPhones is being managed by Apple (my own unsubstantiated speculation) in the same manner that Nintendo is maintaining supplies short on the Wii.
 

frank781

macrumors member
Jul 22, 2002
33
0
Mexico
iMan and Mac mini updates in April

First off, let's look at the bigger context. I see this stuff as someone who has followed Apple pretty closely for the last 10+ years and I guess I expect others to attempt to see it in that context too, not isolate it to only the last year.

Apple's update cycle for computers, especially the consumer-level stuff has dropped off sharply while all their activity lately seems focused primarily on the iPhone and to a lesser extent, the iPod. To me, after having gone through the old days of frequent updates and seeing that drop off to 11 months at a time, well... that's close enough to a year from my viewpoint. If you want to split hairs, fine, but there's no denying that Apple appears to be shifting into a yearly update cycle.

Second, you're downplaying what I'm saying by using only the current cycle. The previous update was close to a year. As it stands, the iMac and the Mini are 9 months past their last updates. A few years ago, that would have been unthinkable. We would have seen a price drop or a specs bump around 4-5 months and would be talking about what's coming up next month or sooner. Nowadays, nothing.

Third, I think it's pretty safe to say that Apple likely won't be updating the iMac or Mini until late summer or later. If they've waited this long, what's the rush? And from what I see, the two are probably selling well enough.

It's unfortunate that Apple is going to let the computers lag at a time when consumers are really interested in Apple's machines. They should be trying to blow people's minds with the consumer-level stuff, but it's just withering on the vine.

I agree with you on how cyclical Apple is about releasing updates on products, but in the case of iMac and Mac mini, the reason for the delay is most probably stock clearance of the current Merom chipsets.

As was indicated in another discussion thread, Intel seems to be pushing their vendors from the Merom CPU to Penryn as quickly as possible. So even if Apple doesn't want to update right now, they'll have to because the CPU they are using will no longer be available.
 

nippyjun

macrumors 68000
Jul 26, 2007
1,638
323
What if the 3G phone was not initially for the US market? What clearance does 3G need in other countries?

If it is for the US market, and Apple wants to keep the 1st gen phone around, i don't think a $100 price difference between the generations is enough. I think it needs to be at least $200. Drop the 16 gig phone to $299 and make the 3g phone $499 or more.
 

GQB

macrumors 65816
Sep 26, 2007
1,196
109
Wow. Constant updates and price drops and tinkering and tweaking the iPhone and yet what kind of activity are we seeing with the iMac and the Mac Mini? :mad:

Love the phone, Apple, but the new thing where the computers are updated yearly sucks.

Apple's priorities are (or need to be)
1) mobile platform (iPhone, wi-fi in your pocket, 'tablet', etc)
2) laptops
3) desktops

Doing that positions them to dominate for the next 10 years.
Doing otherwise sets them up as the next Dell.

IMHO, desktops are essentially moribund technology, if only from a 'green' POV.
 

GQB

macrumors 65816
Sep 26, 2007
1,196
109
One final thing to note, if Apple announces at WWDC and has a 6 week lead time, they'll be spreading the iPhone sales drought across two quarters, which helps financially - you can blame any poor sales on the last few week of the Q because everyone is waiting for the new phone and then in the new quarter you get great sales numbers from people buying the phone.

'blame' is irrelevant to 'The Street'.
I don't see Apple risking numbers for 2 consecutive quarters.
Apple's biggest skill has been supply channel control. I don't see them screwing it up this time.
 

7on

macrumors 601
Nov 9, 2003
4,939
0
Dress Rosa
What I'm hoping for is maybe there is a loop hole in the AT&T contract that says "current" iPhone must be locked. Maybe we could see the EDGE phone be sold unlocked? T-mo won't use AT&T's 3G bands (dumb move) and Europe doesn't use AT&T's 3G bands either. An unlocked EDGE iPhone still has a market, and while you can unlock it yourself... I'd rather try and keep a warranty...
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.