My friend had that phone. It was a **** phone, the 100 song max was definitely a factor but the phone itself was a complete disaster.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
An Inside Look at Google's Reaction to the Original iPhone Introduction
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
My friend had that phone. It was a **** phone, the 100 song max was definitely a factor but the phone itself was a complete disaster.
If it was the iTunes part that guaranteed its failure and if Apple was worried about it cannibalizing iPod sales, why would Apple agree to the venture in the first place?
As KDarling has said: I've said and post links a million times to this NOT being the case.
Jeff Hawkins was the founder of Palm with the help of a bunch of investors to help develop hand recognition software.
Both devices came out at the same time, failed because of terrible software and were canned. Hawkins then made Graffiti which ran on BOTH the Newton and the first Palm.
This kind of misinformation is exactly what I was talking about before.
Everyone seems to think every piece of tech that has ever been made came from the bowels of Apple Computers Inc.
The first Newton came out in 1993, Palm was founded in 1992.
** Don't read this in an angry tone. Read it more like I am having a conversation with you over a cup of espresso. I do like going down memory lane **
Very true. Folks usually move around in every industry. In the early days of SV, starts ups came, succeeded, were bought, and then the founders splintered off again to repeat the process.
But that never happened.
The iPhone's UI was then and still is to this day a very basic concept that stems from the Newton's and therefore Palm's early days back in early 1990's
There really isn't much outside of that save for how you unlock the device and how you pinch to zoom.
Or, we have to admit that Apple has flat out stolen from Palm's WebOS and Android 2.3, not to mention the original GUI from Xerox.
To suggest that it was completely original and that much of it was not predictable is cRaZy...
I used my finger for many of the functions on my palm, progressing to not using the stylus seems pretty logical to me, once they could sense better on the screen the stylus wasn't necessary any more. Using two fingers instead of one is a pretty natural evolution, so is scrolling instead of pagedown/pageup/right/left cursor button (like the Palm). Faster cellular service, faster processors and higher resolution screens (all pretty predictable evolutions) is a good part of what makes the web experience what it is; just like iPhone Safari is a much better experience on an LTE retina larger display than it was on the non-retina edge device.
I had a phone built into all the Palm OS devices that I owned and my contacts, calendar and address book synced with my desktop; the contacts list could be used to dial the phone. I had CUT AND PASTE and a camera built in too. I used the mobile web site most of the time because it was significantly faster and easier to read on the low resolution screen. I even had headphones on my Palm and I could sync (sort of easily) with not protected music and podcast with iTunes. Software like AvantGo pretty much could sync with "feeds" from some of my favorite websites and I had news to read on the go.
Was the iPhone clearly ahead when it came out? NO, it was a beautiful device and was pretty slick, but until it had apps it was severely lacking in a lot of ways (even compared to the Newton!).
Once it had apps (and cut and paste), it was farther down the line and the superior product.
Gary
But hey, at least my old Windows Mobile devices came with Copy and paste already baked into the OS
- Copy & Paste
as well as:
- Wireless file transfer via Bluetooth and WiFi
- Wireless printing via Bluetooth and WiFi
- MS Office Mobile with cloud sharing
- Attaching files from the web browser and email client
- App stores via broadband to download and pay for apps
- MMS & SMS
- Saving and archiving of MMS, SMS, and vCards to . . . . wait for it . . . SD cards
- Downloading music over broadband
- Livestreaming of audio/video (albeit terrible quality)
- Apps that gave you widget style information at a glance built into the OS or via an app download
- Brick and mortar stores for customer service (for Palm anyway)
- Wireless transfer of applications from one device to another via IR, WiFi, and Bluetooth
- Larger than 3.5" screen
Copying
Take Apple's Macs for example, they didn't create the mouse or cursor, as far as I know, they visited some Xerox campus/building and copied them. Sure, Google has borrowed afrom nd copied Apple, but Apple has also (from others). The core of OSX is Unix, which Apple did NOT create. They borrowed it. Like others have said, companies innovate, copy and borrow allot of the time from products by other people/companies.
Take Apple's Macs for example, they didn't create the mouse or cursor, as far as I know, they visited some Xerox campus/building and copied them. Sure, Google has borrowed afrom nd copied Apple, but Apple has also (from others). The core of OSX is Unix, which Apple did NOT create. They borrowed it. Like others have said, companies innovate, copy and borrow allot of the time from products by other people/companies.
Apple was worried about competition from phones with MP3 players. So they felt they needed to come up with their own "iTunes phone".
I think Apple still has the juice, they just don't have the Jobs-kick-the-industry-in-the-b@lls-juice that they had back in 2005.
I am glad that they are following in the footsteps of Google and moving everyone to the cloud. It needs to happen, and when it becomes ubiquitous with computing we won't have to worry about storage, file sizes, NTFS/HFS+, etc. etc.
My biggest problem with Apple isn't even innovation. The Mac Pro is a breakthrough in what you can shove into a tiny space. My problem is that Apple will start doing things like that just for the hell of it and totally miss the point . . . . that some . . . some of these products need to address a certain problem as opposed to a certain desire.
This is the first time in almost 11 years that I've started looking over and drooling over PC hardware, software, and ecosystems with the intent to BUY. Every time I go to Best Buy or MicroCenter and play with the Surface or that Dell 8" Windows RT tablet, and Windows 8 PCs I see the end result of what Apple is trying to do.
Sure, MS didn't get it quite right, but Apple now has to think of a way to merge iOS and MacOSX without looking like MS, but at the same time not give users gimmicky desktop OS features.
For the first time in a LONG time, I am looking at MS as the underdog, and I like what I see.
----------
Get over it and stop derailing the thread.
Why are you showing so much hate for the iPhone?
No hate, just perspective.
Well the article is not about Microsoft or Blackberry. What place would you put them?
Don't agree. Technically maybe yes but the Newton was big, bulky and heavy. The Palm was small, light and fitted in your pocket. That's why it succeeded - because it better met what customers wanted from a PDA.
In many ways the Palm Pilot laid the foundations for the smartphone. It was light, portable and very addictive if you had one. They had the first real online store for app's. It was touch screen (albeit with a stylus). The business model was all there for Apple to take and build into the iPhone.
I think its fine for Apple that Google will be iOS alternative... the problem is Samsung... they are copying Apple design... outside and inside.
The first HTC is different from iPhone... while Samsung first Galaxy is copying the look and feel.. and also spamming Galaxy Y a totally iPhone ripoff.
Of course, it was not the first touch "device" with a finger oriented UI. There had been plenty of those in other fields.
I think what you meant was first smartphone with a UI designed for touch.
However, even that honor must go to what was also the first smartphone in the world, the 1994 IBM Simon.
Of course, it was ahead of its time. After that, there were other all-touch smartphones, both concept and commercial. Big buttons, slide to unlock, orientation sensors, all black front, you name it, it was done.
Hmm. I think that what the iPhone did most differently (besides being from a well liked and known company), was that it included a fun factor that more function oriented phone designers had eschewed. I don't know how else to put it. For example, flick scrolling was well known, but other designers still used scrollbars, because they made more sense for long documents... and still do. It defied common sense to get rid of them as a primary list navigation method. Yet Apple did.
Thoughts?
Once Microsoft takes second place from Apple you'll be saying the same thing about them. I love Android but I changed my out look on WP after buying a Nokia 521 for $61 with no contract this past Sunday for my daughter. Very capable smartphone with removable battery and sd card support. All that's really missing are the apps but I remember the same being said about Android.
Today you could have gotten a Nokia 520 for $39 shipped from Amazon. Even if you use it as a music player and offline gps unit without phone service you're still ahead of the game.
I don't see the problem. I'm just trying to tell it how it is. There are rarely absolutes in this world.
We're talking about a user interface. So, yes, usability counts.
Otherwise it's amounts to a tech demo. That's fine if you're a researcher... kudos to whoever first demonstrated the key distinguishing technologies in the iPhone like multi-touch screens.
But when you're talking about consumer products, usability counts. Without it the most advanced technology in the world amounts to nothing. Because it can't do anything if people don't use it.
I don't think I'm a fanboy (however obliquely you call me one) for distinguishing between a useless device with a touch screen and a very useful one. The iPhone didn't usher in the era of mobile computing just because it had a touch screen. That's just one aspect of the device, which itself is just one aspect of an ecosystem that defined the future of mobile computing.
Yes, all the pieces were there, in one form or another, before Apple. Yet, it wasn't obvious how to put them together until Apple did it. Remember, the king of the hill the day before the iPhone was unveiled was Blackberry, which is now considered a veritable joke in comparison. I think if, the day before it was unveiled, Apple had just killed it, we'd all still be using smart phones, but most (whether Blackberry, Android, or Windows-based) would have half-sceens, qwerty thumboards, and scroll wheels.
I agree when apple didn't get into net books, but the option of a larger phone makes business sense, and the sales numbers will speak for them selves.
If apple gets into a larger phone, it will be there main cash cow.
----------
I liked how the ipad has progressed, but don't you think the market is catching up to them? Let's say they do come out with a watch, i'm sure they will do an awesome job of it. But they shouldn't let there phone and IOs become dry....
Indeed, all of your points are correct.
Hm, I suppose it's not any specific technology that made the iPhone stand out, but how all of it was put together... highly responsive touch screen, high-quality display, intuitive well-designed smooth UI, decent battery life, highly portable, reasonable price (not on day one, but they got there), beautiful design, top-notch music store, wide array of apps (starting in the second year), and a few things I probably forgot.
How about this: it was the first all-in-one device that was actually better than the individual devices, even if you didn't count the hassle of carrying around multiple devices.
You pretty much got it. Apple isn't a company that invents new technologies. They'll develop a few here and there, but they crib parts and ideas from everywhere, just like everyone else.
What Apple does is take things that have been done elsewhere, and make them more elegant and easy to use. They're an ergonomics and design company, in other words. Something I'm sure everyone from Tim Cook, to Jony Ives, to the post guy down in the basement will admit to.
What you refer to as "dry" is the maturation of a market. The mold is basically set as far as smartphones go, and will not be broken until a real breakthrough in manufacturing. Once a market matures you see mostly just spec updates, rather than a radical new interpretation.
Now what we see in the post you quoted is what Apple's strategy has been for the last decade or so:
1. Bust open a new market with a radically different device (iPod, iPhone, iPad)
2. Crank out refinements for 2-4 years to stay ahead of the competition, thus pulling the entire market along
3. Start prepping internally for a new market to enter
Apple has been on an innovation tear for 3 different markets in the last decade. People can say they weren't the first, but the fact stands that Apple has essentially defined each of the 3 markets it has entered. Apple has two more markets that are about to be disrupted over the next two years, the smart watch (will not in anyway be what people are expected (I say this as a pebble owner)), and the TV. One can argue that iOS in the car is going to be a game changer but I see it as more of a continued solidification of the ecosystem.
My prediction: The "iWatch" and television will be Apples entry point into the smart home. Apple's wireless charging patents and connectivity with beacons (aka every device since the 4S is capable of sharing information) and cars means that apple's "virtual assistant" is finally coming true but on a much grander scale than the 20+ year old concept video ever foretold.
We are headed for an exciting 2014-1017 stretch, and if you think the world has changed dramatically since 2001 (iPod), hold on to your hat fellas, its a whole new world on the way.
Nope, it's just constantly re-asking for your password forcing you to setup TID again and crashing, forcing a reboot because you have more than two windows open in Safari.
Ok, I kid, I kid!
Android UI has pull down notification, app drawer, widget screens from the beginning.
Did ios? No. I just don't see how that is copying apple.
Capacitive Touch screen? LG came out with a full slate capacitive touch screen phone before apple. It is not like a touch screen phone without keyboard didn't exist before iphone.
Multi touch? All it brought was some additional gesture like pinch to zoom. But in the grand scheme of things single touch still forms most of the UI interactions.
What apple did was popularized a full slate stylus free touch screen phone with its quick and responsive screen. This credit must be given to apple. But this is nothing more than e.g. Motorola popularized the clamshell phone. Or Palm with its stylus touch screen.
Apple didn't really invent anything new. It just made the packaging more desirable.
Did ios? No. I just don't see how that is copying apple.
Capacitive Touch screen? LG came out with a full slate capacitive touch screen phone before apple. It is not like a touch screen phone without keyboard didn't exist before iphone.
Multi touch? All it brought was some additional gesture like pinch to zoom. But in the grand scheme of things single touch still forms most of the UI interactions.
What apple did was popularized a full slate stylus free touch screen phone with its quick and responsive screen. This credit must be given to apple. But this is nothing more than e.g. Motorola popularized the clamshell phone. Or Palm with its stylus touch screen.
Apple didn't really invent anything new. It just made the packaging more desirable.