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

Differentiation of Future iPhone Models to be Driven by Software?

If this is true i think steve needs to come back ASAP and smack a few people round the back of the head and tell them not to be so silly... ;)
 
ericinboston said:
Or, not to sound like an old fart, but how about creating an iPhone that lives up the the PHONE portion of the product name?!

I mean, jamming all these extra bells and whistles into iPhones (GPS, games, ipod music, video recording, youtube updating, whatever else) just makes me wonder "um, why is this called an iPhone and not an iThingy?"

I'm not saying the product isn't cool or good...but man, I want to use my phone as a phone...and every blue moon take a picture. And text someone 1-2 times a day. But overall, I want to use it to make phone calls...have a nice speakerphone, great battery, great reception, bluetooth capability, predictive text while texting, a few ringtones for different callers.

So give me an iPhone with the cool features of the 1.0 series that already differentiate it from other CELL PHONES... but cramming 10 new features in ever revision just, in my eyes, begs the consumer to ask why all that stuff is needed.

I'd love an iPhone. I like the way it dials and the nice display and the notepadding features and the virtual keyboard and basically just the way it works as a phone...the user interface. All the other bells and whistles is not even a nice-to-have for me. Put all that stuff into the iThingy.

Maybe Apple should release an iThingy for $199 and $299 and $399 and $499 while creating some $49 iPhones for the rest of as we compare it to our free Motorolla and Nokia and LG phones that come with any carrier in the USA...or even if I had to pay $50 for an "upgraded phone" while signing a new contract.


-Eric
Click to expand...

Then the solution is pretty simple: don't buy an iPhone. I'm sure you could slap an Apple sticker on your $50 LG phone if you just want a phone with an Apple logo :rolleyes:
 
Make ONE TOP QUALITY iPhone an let the applications do any bells and whistles. But also make it so the ONE iPhone can get on ANY network and let the networks fight it out to lower the prices to get our business and upgrade their network so that we can use streaming and tethering & 3G instead of WiFi without bringing down their entire network. After all....we are PAYING THROUGH THE NOSE for it, so we should be able to have FULL access to using what we pay for.
 
terryzx said:
Make ONE TOP QUALITY iPhone an let the applications do any bells and whistles. But also make it so the ONE iPhone can get on ANY network and let the networks fight it out to lower the prices to get our business and upgrade their network so that we can use streaming and tethering & 3G instead of WiFi without bringing down their entire network. After all....we are PAYING THROUGH THE NOSE for it, so we should be able to have FULL access to using what we pay for.
Click to expand...

Yes and make it free as well! Then everybody can have one
 
Not Apple's way

This won't happen. Apple simply doesn't do things this way, it's too complex.:apple:
 
sw -> services

Apple already differentiates by hw: each iPhone model and iPod touch have different hw capabilities: camera, external audio,bluetooth, gps, 3g, proc speed, secondary storage ... New models will add new capabilities, a nano model could be a better integrated (less chips) previous gen device.

Apple could also differentiate by services: like push, mobile.me, monthly rate, number of bg apps supported (due to hw and battery limitations), unlocked phone, extended support ...
Apple would not do something stupid like limiting the number of apps a user can buy, putting artificial sw barriers or injecting badly designed sw to force upgrades (home versions) ... :rolleyes:
 
as long as they can maintain their current level of mediocre quality, I'm ok with a price drop, but not at the cost of quality. I'd actually rather see a huge upgrade in build quality and materials then anything else....
 
Bubba Satori said:
I can see this happening. The Mini and Air are differentiated by the things they can't do because of a lack of power and connections that the Macbooks and Pros can do. Why not a crippled, lower priced iPhone ?
Click to expand...


The rumors is one based on software only though...the Mini and Air are less powerful because of their form factors...thats a trade off.
 
Apple culture of secret

All we got is that some business analyst met with some Apple execs.

It's not even clear if the analyst has given his own thoughts or if the Apple execs gave him some hints on the future of the IPhone.

Even though this forum is MACRUMORS, it would be very surprising that Apple people gave any hint whatsoever on their business plan for the IPhone, since the Apple policy is always tight lips about what's going to happen. They always decide where and when they will let you know what they want you to know. Any innocent video presenting the faintest appearance of a product to come is removed faster then you have time to email your friends about it.

So it's only rumors, keep on everybody, it's a pleasure to read you all
 
lamadude said:
Apple can't do that, microsoft already has a patent on intentionally crippling an OS. (seriously, it was released today, here it is)
Click to expand...

What I gravely disagree with in this patent is this quote:

"An open architecture operating system refers to an operating system that makes numerous functions available to the user and also allows the user to modify the computer by installing additional software programs on the computer that provide additional functionality to the user or by removing software programs from the computer."

To me, that is abhorently wrong. They never define the term "computer". A Computer is not an operating system. It is not a keyboard, either. How the quote should properly be written is:

An open architecture operating system refers to an operating system that makes numerous functions available to the user and also allows the user to modify the computer's behavior while running said operating system by installing additional software programs on the operating system that provide additional functionality to the user or by removing software programs from the operating system.

If you look at the way MS defines an "open architecture operating system" they make it sound like it is permanently engraved (somehow magically) on the computer and that nothing else can ever overwrite it. Operating Systems are nothing more than software programs. Since these software programs do certain things, we label them Operating Systems. Just like certain programs are labeled Word Processing Programs and certain software programs are labeled Device Drivers. If I have the knowledge and understanding of how a computer's hardware architecture is designed, I can write and compile code that that computer can interpret and run...typically (if not all) a computer's first program is an Operating System so that other Programs can run within the Operating System.


Computer patents drive me and billions of others nuts. Not only are key definitions wrong (possibly purposely) but the people reviewing computer patents typically have little to nill understanding of computers and software (like granting Broadvision the patent to a "shopping cart").

-Eric
 
If "Driven by Software" they mean different hardwares abilities will be highlighted by the software features that allows, Then is sort of make sense.

In that all models will be close in physical size but with different internal features like big ram on the iPodTouch Video. Or bigger screen so the dock can stay on screen, multi-core processor lots ram on the iPhone Pro, that runs multi apps.

It's not so much about crippling but allowing higher end features on higher end hardware. Look at what the iPod did. Classic was most features in initial size and price. Nano about size/cost reductions the tech allows.
 
Suddenly Apple is going to intentionally, selectively hobble features of its iPhone OS just so it can artificially create various lower-end versions of the iPhone?

Of course NO.

Does no one pay attention to what Apple does and how they run things? APPLE DOES NOT DO THINGS THE WAY OTHER COMPANIES DO.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
The conclusions in the original article appear to be a misinterpretation of the information they were given. (Maybe, as some have said - Mac-baiters.)

If you want to think about different iPhone models, look at the iPod line.

  • Shuffle - music, no video, no games
  • Nano - music, some video, limited games
  • Classic - music, video, limited games, lots of storage
  • Touch - music, best video, full games and apps

How might this translate to iPhone?

  • Basic - phone, contacts, music, no apps, no calendars etc
  • Gateway - phone, music, video, calendars etc (like Nano), limited games
  • iPhone Classic - as we know it today - phone, music, video, calendars etc, all apps
  • Media Pad - lots of storage??, doesn't need to be a phone, but if it's got 3G it could be, probably Skype though, better Apps than iPhone (more like Mac), 'full video', books (see my blog)

This is more in keeping with Apple's thinking. You can see the market for each product & you know what? it differentiates products by software, but not the stupid (Vista) speculation the geniuses who wrote the article came up with. As everyone keeps saying - Apple is a hardware company.

And, by the way, if we're ever going to have a Touch iMac, it's going to have to lie down, so people's arms don't get tired. And the Media Pad is the gateway-hardware to that form factor in iMacs. Now, there's a plan.
 
albusseverus said:
The conclusions in the original article appear to be a misinterpretation of the information they were given. (Maybe, as some have said - Mac-baiters.)

If you want to think about different iPhone models, look at the iPod line.

  • Shuffle - music, no video, no games
  • Nano - music, some video, limited games
  • Classic - music, video, limited games, lots of storage
  • Touch - music, best video, full games and apps

How might this translate to iPhone?

  • Basic - phone, contacts, music, no apps, no calendars etc
  • Gateway - phone, music, video, calendars etc (like Nano), limited games
  • iPhone Classic - as we know it today - phone, music, video, calendars etc, all apps
  • Media Pad - lots of storage??, doesn't need to be a phone, but if it's got 3G it could be, probably Skype though, better Apps than iPhone (more like Mac), 'full video', books (see my blog)

This is more in keeping with Apple's thinking. You can see the market for each product & you know what? it differentiates products by software, but not the stupid (Vista) speculation the geniuses who wrote the article came up with. As everyone keeps saying - Apple is a hardware company.

And, by the way, if we're ever going to have a Touch iMac, it's going to have to lie down, so people's arms don't get tired. And the Media Pad is the gateway-hardware to that form factor in iMacs. Now, there's a plan.
Click to expand...

Any Nano like iPhone will have all the features of the current iPhone at a minimum. Just like the Nano/Mini family was a die shrink of the iPod.

The Shuffle was the only one to loose function but it had a very clear and different target market, one at isn't likely to exist in the iPhone range.

I can't see them hobbling the platform in any way. But development can go in twos ways. Use Advances to make smaller or cheaper with the same function. Keep Price and Size add new features. Just like the iPod when you get to a point doing both will product different enough products then will see two products.
 
Ain't happening. How long does it takes before the Apple Hardware gets pawned and all the functionality is open on the lower end iPhone bring it on par with the higher end iPhone. Apple has acknowledged the existence of large no Jailbroken iPhones. This will be unfair to those paying premium prices for a higher end iPhones when they can Jailbreak the iPhone. Also Apple wont be willing to shed down their profits when they can sell the same hardware at a even cost.
 
zap2 said:
so basically an iPhone nano?

I think Apple would be better focusing on 199 or lowering the price to 99, with the current device. Normal phones are nice, but I tend to believe smartphones are the futures for the majority of people
Click to expand...

I agree, but it has never been about the price of the phone, it is about the price of the monthly bill!!!

I mean how many iPods does Apple have to sell that are more expensive than the iPhone to help people understand. Now if all of the sudden iPods had a mandatory $75-$100+ monthly bill, you would see sales absolutely plummet like a rock!
 
To everyone saying Apple doesn't intentionally cripple any features, or that it's not their style....
B.U.L.L $.H.I.T.
Stop deluding yourselves.

They do that like NO OTHER. It's been standard procedure with the iPhone since DAY ONE.
Tell me what other piece of phone hardware has EVER been MORE CAPABLE or better suited to send MMS messages than the iPhone.
Yet YEARS after initial release we're still waiting for Apple to "uncripple" that industry standard feature with their 3.0 update.

And take for another example the iPhone's poaster-boy for it's crippled OS: Bluetooth.
Have you ever tried to do anything remotely useful with the bluetooth hardware of the iPhone?
File transfer? Tether? Explorable hardware services?
A 1st gen Motorola Razr could do those! Not the iPhone though.
All of these should be available but are intentionally crippled.
Most iPhone users would be better off turning off the bluetooth radio right now to extend their battery life.
Even after the 3.0 update, the 1stGen will STILL be crippled when it comes to stereo bluetooth (a2dp) and for no real good reason either besides grandfathering the old hardware to drive profits.
Fair? No. But it makes perfect business sense.

I suspect Apple releases crippled software intentionally to maintain the hype between hardware releases through firmware updates.
When everyone is numb to the fact that features are missing they stir up the waters by announcing they are releasing an update with a feature finally included.
Fanbois: "OMG, MMS & PUSH?! APPLE IS AWESOME! A2DP?! So innovative, bleeding-edge and top of the line! They're SO COOL allowing us to do something other phones have been able to do for half a decade! Let me just kneel down here and help you with that belt-buckle Steve... Wait, WHAT?! Copy & Paste?! *merf-merf* OMG Fanboigasm! *swallow*"

Let me guess, 4.0 will headline voice-dialing?:rolleyes:
Come on Apple, stop playing feature catch-up. Add the features everyone else already has so you can focus on NEW features that will actually be innovative!
 
MattInOz said:
The Shuffle was the only one to loose function but it had a very clear and different target market, one at isn't likely to exist in the iPhone range.
Click to expand...

There is a specific market for hands-free, so I could certainly see a wearable iPhone with a voice interface. It would certainly be cheaper than an all-in-one device like the current iPhone, maybe free with a voice only data plan.

I don't see Apple differentiating their hardware with software, so I don't agree with the conclusions of the original article.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back