Apple Smart Phone Speculation

[Stella]

microsoft and Palm - minor players in the smartphone arena.

Actually, Symbian would be far better - windows mobile v Symbian. Depending on Quartz or Series XX ( from Nokia), there is already a huge library of software.

Symbian phones tend to require far less processor power than their window mobile counterpart, and yet have the same functionality. Its software is far less bloated.

There is already the syncing software available for windows, which uses open standard SyncML - microsoft uses its own propriety methods, of course.

There are several microsoft office compatible applications available for the Symbian platform - all - Quartz and Series 60, so apple wouldn't have to worry about this. Apple appear to already have some kind of inhouse Symbian technology - that is used in iSync - on the phones themselves. Small, but a start.

Opera has for a long time had web browser for all Symbian platforms - and the software is pretty good too.

I have long since found Symbian software to be far better than that of microsoft mobile, especially the software shipped with the phones.

Symbian is far more stable, and mature - it has been around for years, and long since developed specifically for smartphones ( originally, from PDAs - Psion - EPOC).

If Apple is going to go with a ready made smartphone OS, then it might as well go with the #1 smartphone OS. It has *double* the marketshare of microsoft - 60%.

Using Windows Mobile for the Apple Smartphone really is the only sensible option. (Distasteful to the zealots perhaps, but sensible.)

It would take Apple a long time to create a robust, power-conserving mobile subset of OSX.

Windows Mobile 5.0 is here today, with a rich feature set that is based on a consistent subset of the Win32 API set.

Quicktime and iTunes already run on the Win32 APIs, so adapting them to Windows Mobile would be a lot faster than building an OSX Mobile subset and then adapting them to the OSX mobile APIs.

The other things that phone users want (Outlook integration, web browsers, etc) are already in Windows Mobile.

A huge set of 3rd party applications are available on Windows Mobile, and the .NET Compact Framework is making it very easy for 3rd parties to increase the number of applications every day.

If Apple wants to do anything more than provide a primitive (but probably pretty) phone with "mApps only" to the die-hards, they'll look at Windows Mobile as the base for their phone.

This may sound like a troll - but why do you think that Palm has produced a Windows Mobile 5.0 version of the Treo? It's simple, they don't want to be stuck with a dwindling, proprietary niche mobile OS offering.

 

[AidenShaw]

...ask Palm...

If Apple is going to go with a ready made smartphone OS, then it might as well go with the #1 smartphone OS. It has *double* the marketshare of microsoft - 60%.

And Microsoft is growing rapidly - and MS just introduced Windows Mobile 5.0 which is getting lots of attention....

Symbian is good for simpler applications - but I doubt that the people clamoring for "Mobile OSX" want a limited phone. An Apple Phone using Symbian would be just one more Symbian phone in a crowded market - it would be hard for Apple to stand out....

Why did Palm choose Windows?

IMO, it's because business wants connectivity with Windows applications.... That's a big market, and probably one that Apple would consider.

Otherwise, the Apple Phone would mostly sell to the group of people who already have 4 or more iPods....

 

[highpass]

why motorola

As a vain gimp, i have had many a phone in my time, ranging from motorola's, to sonyerricsons, to nokias, bla bla.

in my experience, motorola make the most cack phones available. the razr, for example, whilst the most beautifully made flip-phone ever, had and still has, the worst operating system known to man! a real let down. I am not alone on this, as a few mates of mine have had motorolas too, and complain about the exact same issues. yes, great, you can hack them and change bits & bobs.. but these are things that should be satisfactory out-of-the-box.

why have apple chosen to team up with a company renound for letting consumers down with issues such as os speed (eg. the lag when writing an sms is unbearable), instead of going with a company known to please, and make sturdy, long-lasting phones, such as nokia? imagine an apple version of the 8800.. now that would be more fun than a retired priests first night in a whore house.

/edit, woops, guess i shouldve read the above posts before blabbering! assumed it'd be motorola..'scuse me!

 

[ShiggyMiyamoto]

i would definately buy this. the ROKR sucks and i need a new phone badly.


Jesus

OMG I so agree! The ROKR is the right step in the right direction, but it's too klonky, and annoying to carry around, at least that's how it would be for me. The only reason why I'd want the ROKR, given I have the money for it, would be to use full versions of my favorite songs as ring tones instead of 30s clips. Otherwise it'd be useless to me.

On the SmartPhone front, I'd love to see a mobile copy of Mac OS X. That would be sofa king awesome. If creating a mobile version of iTunes is possible, then why not a mini-OS X? And since it will soon be available for both architectures (PPC and x86) I also think they should release it as some sort of installer for generic SmartPhones so they can run the most advanced operating system on the planet along with Macs that already do.

I agree with anyone who says it should be based upon an iPod (nano or not). That would so great. I'd be sold in a minute or less! Please Stevie and co. Please. ^_^;; MacWorld SF is coming soon... Lesee if he mentions anything about it.

Symbian is good for simpler applications - but I doubt that the people clamoring for "Mobile OSX" want a limited phone. An Apple Phone using Symbian would be just one more Symbian phone in a crowded market - it would be hard for Apple to stand out....

I object. lol. I believe that a smart phone with OS X has the tendency to be awesome. Let's just see what happens.


*crosses fingers and hopes for the best*

Edit: reworded some, proofread, and changed the Apple symbol (option-shift-k) to Stevie and co.

Edit 2: Oh sh*t!! I misread that quote. Sorry!! ^^;;

 

[Stella]

Err, Symbian based phones are certinately not "limited" and not a 'simple' smartphone OS. It has support for the casual user as well as corporate users - i.e., From Series 60 type phones to Nokia 9300 etc al to SonyErricsson P9x00.

Symbian phones tend to be more reliable and crash less.

Symbian is an open platform, and gives licensees a lot of freedom to do what they want. Microsoft do not, they control the platform far more than Symbian do.

Palm choosing windows isn't necessarily a good thing. In fact, its been reported of prototype Symbian based Trios. Personally, Palm made a hideous mistake going to microsoft, a thing they will very much regret in the long run.

As I said before, Symbian has got good connectivity for windows already, plus it uses open protocols which is a Good Thing.

If your going with a smartphone, you may as well go with the #1 - its not there for no reason. Symbian is very much proven, microsoft has just to be really tested.

For the few years, Symbian have been *increasing* their marketshare, with phone shipments constantly exceeding 100%. microsoft mobile may be growing rapidly, but so is Symbian!

Personally, I'd prefer Apple to make their own smartphone OS, there is a market for it. I think Apple could do a damned good job at it too. They wouldn't have to make the phones themselves, they could woo the phone manufacturers, i.e., Moto.

And Microsoft is growing rapidly - and MS just introduced Windows Mobile 5.0 which is getting lots of attention....

Symbian is good for simpler applications - but I doubt that the people clamoring for "Mobile OSX" want a limited phone. An Apple Phone using Symbian would be just one more Symbian phone in a crowded market - it would be hard for Apple to stand out....

Why did Palm choose Windows?

IMO, it's because business wants connectivity with Windows applications.... That's a big market, and probably one that Apple would consider.

Otherwise, the Apple Phone would mostly sell to the group of people who already have 4 or more iPods....

 

[SubClub]

I would be extremely surprised if Apple tried to create their own mobile OS. If there ever will be a Apple phone it will be based on Symbian with Apple designed GUI. However, I would assume that if Apple phone will be released then it will be more or less co-branded phone and not a full on Apple design.

 

[Hertog]

It will be interesting to see how an Apple handles input, since a ten digit keypad wouldn't 'fit in' that well with Apple's iPod design. Maybe they could make a semi-touchscreen that acts like a keypad when in phone mode and as a clickwheel in other cases. Or maybe they go back to basics and make a clickwheel with which you can actually dail a number 🙂

 

[MontyZ]

.

 

[AidenShaw]

Another thought - Linux might be a good fit for Apple

The new phone could run Mac OSX Mini.

By the way, I spent the whole week at the Smartphone Summit (http://www.smartphonesummit.com) and CTIA Wireless I.T. & Entertainment (http://www.wirelessit.com/index.cfm) conferences in San Francisco - so I've heard everything that people are claiming (keynotes by MS, Palm, Nokia, Intel - the Gates Treo 700w announcement...). Not claiming that I know the whole truth - but do note that my opinions are based on real study and the latest information (some of it under NDA).

On the Motorola front, they have or have supported 30 different operating systems for phones (mostly hardware specific RTOS). They're working to reduce that to 3 main ones - Windows/Symbian/Linux.

Which brings up the thought that Linux ("MontaVista Linux http://www.mvista.com/) might be a great fit for Apple.

OSX is mostly just a GUI layer built on top of BSD on top of Mach.

Apple could make an OSX-like GUI and layer it on top of a well-known embedded Linux platform.

My push for Windows or Linux under Mobile OSX is based on the rich APIs and Internet heritage of these systems. If you're going to build an Internet aware smartphone, better to use a subset network operating system (Windows or Linux) rather than a simpler system that's being stretched to cover new features that weren't thought of in the original design (Symbian).

Do you want yet another simple email-capable phone - or do you want the "Newton Phone"???

Symbian isn't that popular on the PDA-like and "laptop replacement" smartphones - you find Windows and Palm there. Linux isn't there now (it's mostly found replacing the RTOS in simpler phones, and in vertically integrated devices).

 

[AidenShaw]

check Windows "Smartphone" vs "PocketPC Phone Edition"

Y'all might also want to think about the fact that Microsoft offers two versions of Windows Mobile for smartphones

• Smartphone Edition - normal 0-9 phone keypad, plus "5-way" nav keys and a couple other keys
• PocketPC Phone Edition - full "iPaq" PDA system with telephone radio support

This allows both very small phones with smart features (media players, email, calendar, GPS mapping functions,...) as well as larger PDA-like phones with QWERTY keyboards, handwriting recognition, and high resolution screens.

The first is for people who treat the PDA function in a mostly "read-only" manner (check mail, get calendar alerts, view pictures and videos,...). Writing emails and stuff is possible, but a bit slow (think SMS but over email).

The larger phones are for people who want a better read/write experience, and don't mind the added bulk. Apple should consider offering that choice if it decides to sell a phone....

 

[Stella]

STOP PRESS - What a revolution from microsoft - NOT!!!!!

WHOOPIE DOO!!!!

Symbian has offered this functionality for years, at least since 1999/2000....

These days, its Series 60, keypad based, Series 90 - Touch screen, Quartz ( UIQ ) - Touch screen and keypad based ( UIQ 3.0 ).

Once again, another person going on about how wonderful microsoft is without knowing the competitors, in fact, Symbian, the #1 smartphone OS has offered this for at least 5 years!!

FACT: microsoft is a minor player. Apple should not pick up the underdogs. they should go with the #1. If they had done, the iTunes phone wouldn't be a piece of complete ****! Apple should have partnered with Nokia or SE who make significantly better phones than Moto ( Moto - they also make Symbian based phones btw).

Y'all might also want to think about the fact that Microsoft offers two versions of Windows Mobile for smartphones

• Smartphone Edition - normal 0-9 phone keypad, plus "5-way" nav keys and a couple other keys
• PocketPC Phone Edition - full "iPaq" PDA system with telephone radio support

This allows both very small phones with smart features (media players, email, calendar, GPS mapping functions,...) as well as larger PDA-like phones with QWERTY keyboards, handwriting recognition, and high resolution screens.

The first is for people who treat the PDA function in a mostly "read-only" manner (check mail, get calendar alerts, view pictures and videos,...). Writing emails and stuff is possible, but a bit slow (think SMS but over email).

The larger phones are for people who want a better read/write experience, and don't mind the added bulk. Apple should consider offering that choice if it decides to sell a phone....

 

[AidenShaw]

take a chill pill, dude

These days, its Series 60, keypad based, Series 90 - Touch screen, Quartz ( UIQ ) - Touch screen and keypad based ( UIQ 3.0 ).

And what about Series 80 in the 9300 ?? That still falls far short of the PDA functionality in Windows Mobile and Palm, IMO.

Which reinforces my argument that Symbian (which seems to be rather strongly controlled by Nokia, in spite of its claims to independence) is tacking warts on top of warts to deal with new demands not foreseen in the original design.

Also, I did not claim that MS is the only company to segment a product for different form factor phones. I presented it as an option that I thought that Apple should consider. The tone of your reply was unwarranted.

If you want a "Newton Phone" - IMO you're not going to get it with Symbian....

 

[Stella]

The tone of your reply was unwarranted.

Yes, it was, I apologise.

 

[steve_hill4]

FACT: microsoft is a minor player. Apple should not pick up the underdogs. they should go with the #1. If they had done, the iTunes phone wouldn't be a piece of complete ****! Apple should have partnered with Nokia or SE who make significantly better phones than Moto ( Moto - they also make Symbian based phones btw).

I agree, Sony Ericsson phones are brilliant as mp3 players, but could you ever see Sony pairing up with apple? Nokia would have been a huge partner, but again I can't see that happening as Nokia know they will sell their phones with or without apple, so they can stick their own mp3 players in there.

Microsoft however are really pushing for TV and mobile users at the moment. Media Centre will be the centre of Vista and everytime I see the Microsoft rep, she asks about training us for Windows mobile. Trust me, Microsoft are going to amke a huge push in that area over the next 12-24 months. I even see them pushing Palm as far as possible and palm becoming the apple of the PDA/Smartphone world.

 

[AidenShaw]

...everytime I see the Microsoft rep, she asks about training us for Windows mobile. Trust me, Microsoft are going to amke a huge push in that area over the next 12-24 months. I even see them pushing Palm as far as possible and palm becoming the apple of the PDA/Smartphone world.

If you develop for Windows using Visual Studio, it's obvious that MS is making a major Windows Mobile investment.

The tools and libraries that are available for Windows Mobile 5.0 development are amazing. The .NET Compact Framework gives a rich object environment that greatly speeds product development.

The framework functions also abstracts many of the UI functions, making it simpler to develop applications that run on all three Windows Mobile platforms (Smartphone, PDA w/ phone, PDA (iPaq) only).

Windows Media Player 10 on the mobile platform is a pretty decent piece of work too, as well as mobile Office and IE.

Within a year, I predict that "laptop replacement" phones will be on the market. These will be PDAs with builtin phones and wifi, higher resolution screens (VGA 640x480 is here for iPaqs and similar devices), and improved QWERTY keyboards. Today the Dell Axim has a VGA dongle so that you can use it for projecting presentations.

Obviously, these won't replace *all* laptops - but the phone will be functional enough that many people will start to go on trips and leave their laptops at home. The phone will give them email, office, and the other apps that are needed.

http://www.sprint.com/business/products/phones/ppc6700_allPcsPhones.jsp

 

[steve_hill4]

I still like palm though, they may not be cutting edge all the time, but there's a certain user friendliness about their products. However I don't think Microsoft have really even started to push their mobile platforms enough yet and when they do, anyone will have a major fight on their hands.

 

[hyperpasta]

NEVER underestimate Apple! I wouldn't be surprised if they already have a light version of OS X already running. Something along the same lines as how OS X has been running on intel chips since the beginning.

VERY true. I have a hunch Apple has loads of fully functioning products ready for use in an emergency:

- iTunes with 100-song cap for all Pocket PCs in case Windows Media gains traction there

- iWork with a very, very good Office convertor for when Microsoft cuts off Apple

- iTunes for the PSP in case Microsoft uses it to promote WMV

All sorts of things could be brewing!

 

[beatle888]

I am all for Apple design but the PC market share is about 4% which makes it rather unactractive for phone operators. Let's be real, the phone would have to synch with Outlook to have a real chance of becoming a market breaker.

isnt that sorta short sighted? just because apple has a limited market share when it comes to PC's, it doesnt mean that they cant make software (itunes?) that works well with windows based PC's.

dont you think so?

 

[AidenShaw]

huh?

- iTunes with 100-song cap for all Pocket PCs in case Windows Media gains traction there!

Sorry, but we already have Windows Media without a cap on Pocket PC and Smartphones....

All the MP3s, WMAs, and even AACs that we want - just none of Apple's proprietary tunes.

 

[aswitcher]

I would prefer Apple went with Symbian just to stop MS causing mischief and to keep as much open source stuff happening as possible. For example, widgets for mobiles 😉

 

[hulugu]

isnt that sorta short sighted? just because apple has a limited market share when it comes to PC's, it doesnt mean that they cant make software (itunes?) that works well with windows based PC's.

dont you think so?

No. I can't think of a single example where Apple was able to make a device that went far and beyond their market-share. Oh wait....


How about the freaking iPod?

 

[AidenShaw]

Symbian is licensed, proprietary OS

I would prefer Apple went with Symbian just to stop MS causing mischief and to keep as much open source stuff happening as possible. For example, widgets for mobiles 😉

"open source" doesn't mean "not Microsoft"....

Now if Apple put their proprietary GUI on top of embedded Linux, it would meet your goal.

 

[aswitcher]

"open source" doesn't mean "not Microsoft"....

Now if Apple put their proprietary GUI on top of embedded Linux, it would meet your goal.

🙂 That would make me very happy

 

[AidenShaw]

Nokia using Linux in tablet, delays music phone

A related story:

http://news.com.com/Nokia+delays+shipments+of+Web+tablet/2100-1044_3-5889006.html

"The tablet, which is intended to enable users to browse Web sites and check e-mail, is now expected to start shipping in the fourth quarter.

The Finnish mobile firm had originally expected the tablet, which runs on Linux-based software, to enter the market before the end of September"

...

"The Finnish group also cited software issues when it said last month that it would delay the launch of its premium N91 "jukebox" mobile phone until the first quarter of next year."