Apple and Cisco iPhone Negotiations

[wildmannz]

Why Cisco Sued???

Don't believe everything that Cisco says - they employ spin also (they're not stupid.)

I found this interesting quote...

Cisco doesn't want royalties on iPhone. Cisco could care less about keeping the name iPhone. These theories are all wrong.
Cisco's trying to get cool. It isn't cool now.

See more here:
http://www.thestreet.com/_tscs/markets/activetraderupdate/10332081.html

 

[puuukeey]

well.. with all those comments about "it's macworld. you didn't even mention the mac!"

um... maybe its time arn switched over to applerumors.com

 

[Counter]

Apple really wanted people to refer to this as the iPhone. To really tie in buying by association with iPod. Now everybody is calling it the iPhone, Apple can say legally that it's full name is Apple iPhone. Printing the Apple logo before the iPhone text everywhere....as they are. Nobody will call it by it's full name now and seeing the Apple logo before the name on everything doesn't throw you off.

I say screw Cisco.

 

[coumerelli]

NO company gets into a 2 year exclusive contract, with no ability to allow unlocked phones, witout being held over a barrel of some form or another. Sorry but this sounds very much like Cingular were the ones pulling the strings on this deal. WHich has been my assumption as to what was going to happen since day one.
The iPod had a massive following when the labels came to Apple or Apple came to them. Apple was in a situation to dictate terms. In this case while I'm not doubting that Cingular is going to get a lot of new signups because of the iPhone I HIGHLY doubt it would be a make or break situation for them if Apple went with...say T Mobile. To put it another way. Cingular has more to offer Apple then Apple has to offer them. Apple is the new kid on the block with a nifty idea.
I'm going to be frank, I've talked to about a dozen iPod carrying people in the last few days. Not a single one. Not one is interested in the iPhone. The reasons are varied but there is some aspect that they don't like about it. Now that I learned that you need to sign up for an additional 2 years if you get this thing....I expect even the Cingular customers I know are going to be iffy on it.

This 'new two-year contract' is true whenever you change your plan with Cingular/Sprint/whoever! Seriously! Who in the last 10 years has offered a month-to-month?! c'mon! NObody. And one-year contracts are practically extinct, too.

 

[Stella]

I dislike the way Apple have repeatedly attempted to buy the iPhone name - i.e., by setting up a 'communications' company facade in an attempt to use that to buy iPhone.

Apple do not know the meaning of 'No'.

Cisco started using the iPhone name again since 2004, so its not so recent.

Why characterize it as "low ball"? Cisco hasn't used the name until just recently and it's obvious that the only reason they are is because of the success Apple has had with it's iMac, iPod, iTunes, ect. Apple popularized and brought the 'i' branding into the common vernacular. Cisco doesn't need it and they have been sitting on this name for just an occasion like this. Sounds to me like Apple tried nice to license it from them and Cisco took it too far; so Apple told them to f-off we'll see you in court. I'd say it was Cisco being overly oppertunistic when they are on such shakey ground. I hope Apple wins this.

This 'new two-year contract' is true whenever you change your plan with Cingular/Sprint/whoever! Seriously! Who in the last 10 years has offered a month-to-month?! c'mon! NObody. And one-year contracts are practically extinct, too.

Maybe not in the States, but in Canada, Fido does! And its really very very useful.

 

[izzle22]

NO company gets into a 2 year exclusive contract, with no ability to allow unlocked phones, witout being held over a barrel of some form or another. Sorry but this sounds very much like Cingular were the ones pulling the strings on this deal. WHich has been my assumption as to what was going to happen since day one.
The iPod had a massive following when the labels came to Apple or Apple came to them. Apple was in a situation to dictate terms. In this case while I'm not doubting that Cingular is going to get a lot of new signups because of the iPhone I HIGHLY doubt it would be a make or break situation for them if Apple went with...say T Mobile. To put it another way. Cingular has more to offer Apple then Apple has to offer them. Apple is the new kid on the block with a nifty idea.
I'm going to be frank, I've talked to about a dozen iPod carrying people in the last few days. Not a single one. Not one is interested in the iPhone. The reasons are varied but there is some aspect that they don't like about it. Now that I learned that you need to sign up for an additional 2 years if you get this thing....I expect even the Cingular customers I know are going to be iffy on it.

Well, That's very strange. Everybody I talk to(even non Apple people)wants this phone and said they will switch from Sprint, Verizon or T-Mobile just to have this phone. You must be in high school or college and your circle of friend must not have the money for the phone. All the negative things I've read is mostly from people who can't afford the phone anyway.

 

[hagjohn]

Why characterize it as "low ball"? Cisco hasn't used the name until just recently and it's obvious that the only reason they are is because of the success Apple has had with it's iMac, iPod, iTunes, ect. Apple popularized and brought the 'i' branding into the common vernacular. Cisco doesn't need it and they have been sitting on this name for just an occasion like this. Sounds to me like Apple tried nice to license it from them and Cisco took it too far; so Apple told them to f-off we'll see you in court. I'd say it was Cisco being overly oppertunistic when they are on such shakey ground. I hope Apple wins this.

Cisco still has first use rights... as they are selling a product "now"... Apple will not sell one till June.

 

[RichP]

I agree with izzle; in NY, people EVERYWHERE are talking about it. And they are willing to change contracts, etc to get one. I certainly hope the iPhone is "smarter" than we have been recently told (no 3rd party apps, etc) but honestly, all the phones out there are a far cry from what a phone could be as a user experience.

Ive never seen the contracts as a huge deal. All the phone companies just extend them out when you need a new phone, and they are under $200 to break, which is no chump change, but, when you think about it, it just about covers the subsidized cost on most mid-to-upper tier phones.

The rest of the world is no different, either. You either pay now for the phone (europe) or you pay over time (US with contract)

And VOiP on the iPhone? Thats not part of the apple experience. When people want to make a call, they want to dial or select the person from contacts, and press Send. No finding Wifi, no entering WEP keys. A few years, when WiMax and other technologies are out there, THEN iPhone will have such features.

 

[papaburgundy]

Flash forward 5 years...

I will enjoy looking back on these threads years from now. It really does remind me of the reaction to the ipod. What was Apple doing? This thing will never fly. People on this thread are acting as though Mr. Jobs has just laid down all of his cards. He hasn't. Just as he released the ipod with a larger vision in mind, iTunes. I think Apple is still "thinking different". We just need to be patient and let the "master" work.

 

[AtHomeBoy_2000]

LMAO! I love this photo...

"Wait, see, we have an iPhone! It's the same model as before, we just slapped a iPhone label on the plastic wrapping. But we CLEARLY are selling an iPhone."

 

[thedonga]

Meanwhile, readers note that Apple has been careful to place the Apple logo in front of all references to the iPhone on their web pages

This is not true. The main page says only iPhone, and the top menu shows no apple logo

 

[JoeG4]

From this old mac zealot, I imagine I'm gonna piss some people off when I say this:

I think cisco deserves the name more than apple.

Sure, the linksys iphones are nothing all that impressive, some of them are previous models that just got rebranded, but last I checked, they're sorta innovative.

The iPhone has a nifty touchscreen that supports gestures. Otherwise, it's an overpriced, underfeatured phone. And when I say overpriced, boy do I mean it.

There's nothing like spitting in the faces of your customers like telling them they don't mean a crap. Somehow, Steve Jobs did it pretty well, and while he didn't say half the things we've been reading about, let's reiterate:

Cingular only until 2009
No replaceable battery
No 3rd party apps allowed (because apparently we're all stupid and don't want them)
No unlocking (Apple plans to take action against people that TRY)

And as far as I'm concerned, it's the tackiest looking thing Apple's made since ... ever... I think. I keep saying to myself it's just a prototype, but I can't get over the shape (reminds me of a PSP but .. squarer) nor the materials (matte black AND aluminum backend, and... shiny black front, with a tasteless chrome ring that spans half the thickness of the phone?!)

I suppose it's natural for me to reject it. I don't have any reason to buy one and it'll cost 3x or maybe even 4x what I could possibly afford (I can't even afford cingular service - it starts at $45 a month with taxes and that's for their cheapest PHONE SERVICE... add in smartphone internet stuff and it's probably 70++++++)

Ouch.

 

[Stella]

Apple have always treated their customers as if they are retarded.

- Ship a one buttoned mouse because we aren't clever enough to have two buttons ( we get a proper mouse from elsewhere ).

- dumbed down iLife apps such as iWeb that are too basic to be usable.

- no Php or other scripting tools in .Mac

- iPod doesn't have a user replacable battery because we don't think your clever enough to replace it yourself. Instead, send us the iPod to replace and we'll charge you $$$ for the service. ( Yes, you can get replacement batteries from elsewhere )


- and as you say, No 3rd party apps for you because we don't think you need them and you don't need them. On top of that, you may bring down an entire cellular network!! LOL.

From this old mac zealot, I imagine I'm gonna piss some people off when I say this:

I think cisco deserves the name more than apple.

Sure, the linksys iphones are nothing all that impressive, some of them are previous models that just got rebranded, but last I checked, they're sorta innovative.

The iPhone has a nifty touchscreen that supports gestures. Otherwise, it's an overpriced, underfeatured phone. And when I say overpriced, boy do I mean it.

There's nothing like spitting in the faces of your customers like telling them they don't mean a crap. Somehow, Steve Jobs did it pretty well, and while he didn't say half the things we've been reading about, let's reiterate:

Cingular only until 2009
No replaceable battery
No 3rd party apps allowed (because apparently we're all stupid and don't want them)
No unlocking (Apple plans to take action against people that TRY)

And as far as I'm concerned, it's the tackiest looking thing Apple's made since ... ever... I think. I keep saying to myself it's just a prototype, but I can't get over the shape (reminds me of a PSP but .. squarer) nor the materials (matte black AND aluminum backend, and... shiny black front, with a tasteless chrome ring that spans half the thickness of the phone?!)

I suppose it's natural for me to reject it. I don't have any reason to buy one and it'll cost 3x or maybe even 4x what I could possibly afford (I can't even afford cingular service - it starts at $45 a month with taxes and that's for their cheapest PHONE SERVICE... add in smartphone internet stuff and it's probably 70++++++)

Ouch.

 

[bbydon]

This suit is not good for apple.
It makes them look bad, and if they win (i hope they settle or lose) then it is bad for all trademarks out there.....and it will make apple out to be a big bully....like M$.

Apple should just rename it and call it a day. save some money and some face

 

[hscottm]

NO company gets into a 2 year exclusive contract, with no ability to allow unlocked phones, witout being held over a barrel of some form or another. Sorry but this sounds very much like Cingular were the ones pulling the strings on this deal. WHich has been my assumption as to what was going to happen since day one.
To put it another way. Cingular has more to offer Apple then Apple has to offer them. Apple is the new kid on the block with a nifty idea.
Now that I learned that you need to sign up for an additional 2 years if you get this thing....I expect even the Cingular customers I know are going to be iffy on it.

I've been thinking about similar things. However a few things to note.

0) I remain surprised at the rumor mill about locked phones. I havent seen anything official from Apple on it though so I wont comment anymore on it. I would have otherwise expected Apple to make an unlocked phone, but if they have a carrier exclusive that answers that for the short term. Once 2009 comes it could easily be unlocked by default.

1) At some point a year or so ago in design/development, Apple would have had to make one of many "go/no go" types of decisions based on whether they felt the telcos were going to allow them any kind of fair entrance into the market at all. Regardless of whether we think Cingular is giving them a "fair" deal, Apple needed some kind of guarantee to keep working on this, otherwise they risked getting to the end point with a great product, and a much less accomodating industry that had even less accomodating terms. I dont know WHEN they agreed upon the conditions, but the alternative could have been much worse - ie much less leverage despite having a great product. A big thing not getting much attention is that the phones will sell for $500 or $600 "with subsidies from contract" - that implies its at least $100-200 more "at retail cost" which means Apple needs to get a bunch out there and made, to bring costs down. If they didnt have an agreement like this, think how few people would be interested in a $600+ unlocked phone.

2) the "2 year" exclusive is really only 18months when you consider the phone wont be out until June 2007. I know thats picking nits, but its important. ALso, when does APple ship things on time? It could end up being a 3 month exclusive

3) As with Leopard, iTV, etc, I am guessing that there are unannounced possible features even in the launch model phone. eg if it runs OSX as announced (even a stripped down version), it could run skype. Basically skype ability would have to be "forbidden" rather than "enabled". So I think Steve purposely made no mention of skype or IP like abilities due to the negotiations with Cisco. I wouldnt be surprised to see the resolution of the cisco TM case and a quick announcement (or, if after June) followed by a software upgrade of some sort that allows Wifi enabled calling.

4) my informal survey of *high end phone users* (treo, Blackberry, etc) finds many interested parties. Remember Apple's goal is 10M (1%) units by end of 2008, not 2007. A 2nd gen phone or SW-upgraded v1 phone that allows wifi calling could easily be what opens the floodgates.

 

[IlluminatedSage]

I don't think some of you understand that part of the locked phone issue is determined by the fact that Apple Needed Cingular (now AT&T) to institute new technical backend infrastructure.

These new system settings for Cingular/AT&T are NOT your regular phone settings, ie allowing the phone to set a conference call between over 3 people.

Or even custom settings for the data exchange over Edge into the phone.

So our being restricted to one carrier for the moment may be to help keep the extra functions of the phone working the best they can.

personally I will wait beyond first generation on this device. why?
1-i don't like EDGE, prefer the new system they have in limited cities already.
2- want user swapable batteries, think it is crazy to have a phone without a battery that can be changed.
3- want a larger capacity like my bigger ipod.

 

[crees!]

Please, tell me how interoperability between Apple's phone and Cisco's phone will be beneficial to me when I will have only 1 phone?

 

[johnmcboston]

I think cisco deserves the name more than apple.
:

Well, if Apple hadn't spend the last few years putting "i" in front of everything, do you think cisco would have ever called anything an iphone?

The iPhone has a nifty touchscreen that supports gestures. Otherwise, it's an overpriced, underfeatured phone.
:

I'd go the other way. This thing does so much stuff, that being a phone is only a small part of it. This is really a hand held mac that happens to be able to make phone calls as well. Why is Apple so set on jamming 'phone' down our throat? A few tweaks you could almost just sell this as a 'mac micro'

 

[mcic1984]

So the facts are that Cisco wants interoperability with its VOIP phones. And Apple ignoring Cisco for now - and Cisco sues Apple. Meanwhile Apple is tied with Cingular (in a mutually beneficial deal - so that Apple can access Cingular's GSM+ networks and Cingular, well, gets the iPhone) until 2009.

Now:
What if this is a way for Apple to keep their options open - i.e. losing the lawsuit as a way to enter the VOIP market before the end of the Cingular agreement?

Yes this is probably way too far-fetched, but hey!

 

[Rodimus Prime]

apple is playing a dangerous game right now because I do not think they are going to win this case and Cisco can keep them tied up in court over it for years and during that time get it banned for apple to use iPhone. And if apple losses they have to pay Cisco for the entire time they been using since day 1, Plus penalties and intersted. It is not going to help apple case the fact that they where in talks with Cisco over the name so that going to get throw back at them. And what apple is doing is very M$ and as bas as it sounds apple slowing heading that way and they are chipping away at there rep as being the good guy to becoming another bad guy.
Lastly putting the apple logo in front of it is not going to save them. an "Apple" iPhone still has to deal with the iPhone trademark

 

[cynerjist]

just a couple comments

1. Why do they want to call it an iPhone anyway?

It's branding should better reflect the multifunction device they are marketing. iComm?

2. A collaboration with Cisco would be great for consumers.

These two companies have different strengths and would complement each other brilliantly. Apple creates easy-to-use interfaces and attractive lifestyle designs, while Cisco has world-class hardware engineers and an obviously vast knowledge of telecom networks. If you consider Apple's two revelations at this MacWorld, collaborating with Cisco makes alot of sense.

Cisco is winning in the media, but the consumers are losing.

 

[dscottbuch]

why interoperability

Please, tell me how interoperability between Apple's phone and Cisco's phone will be beneficial to me when I will have only 1 phone?

1) Your apple iPhone will work seemlessly with you Cisco router in your home, or the cisco router at your work (this would be VOIP)

2) Your cisco iPhone will work seemlessly with your Apple router, or apple itV. not just for the basics but for those 'special' features that will come to differentiate and innovate.

 

[OhEsTen]

geez people...

The product isn't even "out" yet.... it is coming out in 6 months. So the comments about how it's an overpriced touch-screen device are moot until we actually see the final product.

And as far as Apple "bowing to the master" with Cingular... who knows. It's like when Apple started the iTunes Music Store and people complained about DRM... for Apple to even get a deal with these companies, they have to bend a little (not that it's good for us customers though... but what are you going to do?) Cingular will have to bend too... and Apple is pretty good about gunning for that too (songs are still 99¢)...

Also, keep in mind, this is only one iteration of the iPhone.... there will no doubt be more in the coming months... perhaps Apple will release a seperate iPhone that is VOIP compatible.... it's also possible that Apple didn't release that feature yet because of the Cisco deal.

There is just too much speculation at this point to even make a judgement.

Also if Apple dicks around with this iPhone to the point they take their eyes off the Mac platform I will be looking at Windows Vista. At least MS makes it appear that they are still interested in computers even when they enter new markets. The coolness of Apple is starting to fade with me.

This is the funniest post I've read... no disrespect intended... but if you think that Microsoft has the best product - go for it. Why choose a platform for appearances?

 

[barnaby]

I love how most Mac sites are overlooking the claim by Cisco that Apple is pulling some really lowball, VERY Microsoftian, tactics to get the name
Cisco claims Apple used phony company to get name

what this all boils down to is:

It comes down to VOIP. Something that I'm 3000% certain Cingular is not only opposed to, but would rather lop off their their collective wang to avoid.
So what do we have here? Apple doing thy bidding my master. Until 2009 Apple is Cingular's *cough* "friend". The more I read about the iPhone the more I want to throw-up. Apple is selling their soul to get in on this market. Think Different? More like Think Corporate.

1. Apple had to sign exclusive with a carrier because they want control over how the carrier does things. Visual voicemail is just the beginning.

2. promising integration + convergence to Cisco is likely in violation with the exclusive agreement they have with cingular. No matter how you spin it, VoIP is a telephony communication medium.

What it boils down to is Cisco asking Apple to break their contract. The rules of the game are no different for Apple than anyone else.

 

[KilGil27]

I love that Apple is so dead-set against VoIP... this is what we get for their agreement with Cingular.

God, I love how big business works.

Oh, and the whole " iPhone" thing is new. They didn't have that on the site on Tuesday, I'm positive.

Edit: The disclaimer at the bottom is new, too:

both those things were there on Tuesday