iPhone 4GB and 8GB, Coming in January?

[Chundles]

I placed a $50 wager today online that apple will announce the iPhone at macworld in january. it's paying two to one. that means if apple anounces the iPhone at macworld, I'll have an extra hundred bucks to help afford buying one! (of course if they don't announce it, I'll be out $50. boo.)

happy to share the info if anyone wants it, e-mail or message me...

No, you'll have an extra $50. The $50 you place counts as an expenditure until you win, then you get a hundred which cancels out the original money you spent on the bet and gives you $50 profit.

It would need to pay 3:1 for you to get $100 profit.

 

[GregA]

but my one question concerns use during flights. As of right now, we are not allowed to have cell phones on during flight. If the iPod is integrated into the phone, then wouldn't the ipod be unusable in-flight?

Most flights say that you have to turn your phone off, or put it into "flight mode". This disables the wireless parts, but lets you use the calendar, mp3 player, camera, etc.

 

[cheekyspanky]

The mobile phone carriers can block different handsets quite easily so it's possible it won't be a simple case of buy the phone, insert your current USIM and you're good to go.

Saying that though the handsets are one of the biggest aquisition costs for a new customer so if a customer brings their own handset, then still uses all the networks services then it's a bonus all round. The only people that lose out would be Nokia et al.

Unless this handset is with mobile operators now though I can't see it being compatible with any network services by January as it each of the operators have strict guidelines for bringing on a new handset to ensure it meets all of their requirements.

 

[GregA]

People aren't in this thread for advice on which Nokia to buy, they're here discussing a potential iPhone - and what they'd like to see it do. I don't think telling them to get another phone is really constructive.

True to a point. Some people want a brilliant Apple iPhone, and when they list off what they want, there are plenty of phones that already do that. My Nokia N70 is one of them. So would I buy an iPhone? Probably (when my phone OR iPod needs replacing). Why Apple? I want the iTunes integration and I use a Mac so it makes it highly likely.

If I had a PC, would I want an iPhone? I'm not sure. Will it look good? Be robust enough? Fast menus (my Nokia is SLOW)? Integrate with my PC address book & email? What else does it do? I'd certainly have to compare it to the latest similar Nokia - and if I can't list things that make it better than other phones, that would say something.

someone else brought up 3G. GSM carriers in north america are just beginning to roll out 3G (3.5G actually) on a national level. what kind of specs are we going to see? quad band is a given, but will it be North American 3G (UMTS 850/1900) or European Spec (UMTS 1900/2100) [NOTE: my knowloedge of this is a bit patchy, so someone please correct me if im wrong)... there is a difference between european and north american 'Third Generation'. Or will it be 2G with plain jane 850/900/1800/1900? that'd be kind of lame...

Roughly speaking, the 3G phones are more generous in their compatibility with each other than GSM vs CDMA were. And the evolution to 3G still falls roughly along the same lines as GSM vs CDMA, with the exception that several CDMA providers are jumping across to 3GSM instead of CDMA's 3G.

So whether it's 2G or 3G, there's still 2 standards (GSM/CDMA) to choose from (hopefully both will be made). IMO

I hope they do go 3G, but I understand that 2G is a smaller and cheaper technology. It may be very cheap and easy to add GSM to an iPod Nano.

And more expensive to add 3GSM. But it may explain the pricing rumour - $50 more for a 4GB iPhone than a 4GB Nano. $150(?) extra for an 8GB iPhone than a 8GB Nano. Perhaps the 8GB is not just a memory upgrade, but 3GSM too.

 

[zoom1]

No, you'll have an extra $50. The $50 you place counts as an expenditure until you win, then you get a hundred which cancels out the original money you spent on the bet and gives you $50 profit.

It would need to pay 3:1 for you to get $100 profit.

Nope. On a 2:1 wager he would indeed profit $100 (His stake returned and 2x it earned). The wager you describe would be 1:1 or even money. If the wager was 2 FOR 1 then he would be returned $100 FOR his $50 stake.


Either way my guess is he's gonna be out 50 bucks. But damnit my phone is getting old and skittish and I want one in January too.

 

[peharri]

The mobile phone carriers can block different handsets quite easily so it's possible it won't be a simple case of buy the phone, insert your current USIM and you're good to go.

Carriers who support SIM/USIM card based mobile phone systems rarely, if ever, block specific handsets on any basis other than them being stolen. To the best of my knowledge, only Nextel (which I believe had technical reasons for doing so) and a few pre-pay operators that have the credit processing software built into their handset's firmware, generally do this.

I've never come across an operator with its own infrastructure that's blocked the use of their (pay monthly) SIM cards in independently bought handsets.

Unless this handset is with mobile operators now though I can't see it being compatible with any network services by January as it each of the operators have strict guidelines for bringing on a new handset to ensure it meets all of their requirements.

That's nonsense. It might be true for the CDMA2000 operators, but not for the operators who use standards that require SIM/USIM cards (with the possible exception of iDEN, and I seriously doubt the phone will support iDEN.) GSM and UMTS operators just don't work that way, with the exception of the few instances I outlined about.

If there's a notable problem with the phone (ie a fault, that's picked up after release), then I can see them blocking it, but the default is to assume that if it has a valid IMEI, it's a valid phone.

No, you'll probably not be able to put your Net10 or Nextel SIM in. Your T-Mobile and Cingular SIMs, pre- and post-paid, will work fine.

 

[AtHomeBoy_2000]

Key Features...

This iPhone needs a few key features for me to be interested in replacing my current cell (and PDA too)..

1) iCal integration with PDA like abilities
2) Address Book integration (the ability to carry phone numbers AND addresses with me)
3) iPhoto integration (no camera phone, those are so lame)
4) ability to connec with Verizon. I love verzion, I'm not switching to another carrier just to get an iPhone.
5?) This is just a nice little addon - Plug-ins. Such as... a program that gets up-to-date sports scores.

This all needs to be included in the 4GB version. Maybe add GPS or somethign liek that for the 8GB version.

Basically.... it needs to be a Palm Treo Appleized.

 

[theBB]

I placed a $50 wager today online that apple will announce the iPhone at macworld in january. it's paying two to one. that means if apple anounces the iPhone at macworld, I'll have an extra hundred bucks to help afford buying one! (of course if they don't announce it, I'll be out $50. boo.)

I'd think Apple would organize a special event for iPhone, instead of releasing it during MWSF. C2D mini, Leopard Preview, iTV oh, and one more thing iPhone? It sounds like a bit too much. There is also the widescreen video iPod rumors. Still, good luck, who knows...

 

[macman2790]

in the podcast did he mention anything about a camera on the phone, thats the only thing that i see that this thing is missing.

 

[cheekyspanky]

Carriers who support SIM/USIM card based mobile phone systems rarely, if ever, block specific handsets on any basis other than them being stolen. To the best of my knowledge, only Nextel (which I believe had technical reasons for doing so) and a few pre-pay operators that have the credit processing software built into their handset's firmware, generally do this.

I've never come across an operator with its own infrastructure that's blocked the use of their (pay monthly) SIM cards in independently bought handsets.



That's nonsense. It might be true for the CDMA2000 operators, but not for the operators who use standards that require SIM/USIM cards (with the possible exception of iDEN, and I seriously doubt the phone will support iDEN.) GSM and UMTS operators just don't work that way, with the exception of the few instances I outlined about.

If there's a notable problem with the phone (ie a fault, that's picked up after release), then I can see them blocking it, but the default is to assume that if it has a valid IMEI, it's a valid phone.

No, you'll probably not be able to put your Net10 or Nextel SIM in. Your T-Mobile and Cingular SIMs, pre- and post-paid, will work fine.

A handset launching towards the end of the 1st quarter 07 would already be undergoing testing and development by the networks it's launching on. Whether this is the same for the US market I'm not sure but in my experience it's the case in the UK. In regards to blocking, if an Apple phone poses any problem for the networks they can block IMEI ranges and say it's unsupported on their network. An example of this in practise would be - you take a 3G handset and put it's USIM into a 2G handset not sold by the network, within a few days you will get a message warning you the handset is unsupported and will be blocked.

For the timescales and internal testing involved, a new handset that is identical to a currently sold one, but in a different colour, will often have to go through all of the internal testing again for power outputs etc, because of varying metal content within the paints, a totally new handset will take quite some time to be officially supported. I'm sure some networks aren't concerned with any old phone working on their network but there are some that definitely are.

 

[wkhahn]

Rural coverage

Aye, that's true in the States, and generally most of the Americas, as I understand it. If you head across the Atlantic everything is GSM, which makes roaming and interoperability a hell of a lot easier. I'm not sure how good cell phone coverage in rural areas is there though. Perhaps someone from there could let us know?

By no means should my response be construed as "the" response for all rural coverage; In my little part of the country (about 100 mi [160km for those accustomed to the international system]) southwest of STL, if you venture 3 miles from the interstate, cingular is the only coverage you will keep. Verizon, Sprint, T-mobile all drop off at about the distance. Even in a metal building 15 miles from the interstate over hilly terrain I can still get/make calls from my office on Cingular.

 

[Erasmus]

It seems to me that this thing is going to rock.

In terms of ease of use, it shouldn't be very hard to have two entirely different interfaces. One the pretty standard iPod interface, so except for maybe an extra button or two on the front, it looks and behaves just like an iPod Nano.

Slide out the number pad (more realistic and probably over all more "Appleish" than a full Querty keyboard, as it's so much simpler) and the iPhone switches to its phone interface. If you call someone, or receive a call, music automatically pauses.

In terms of the battery, I think the two battery version is an excellent idea. The phone part should have access to both batteries, so even if both batteries are drained, there would still be enough residual power to send and receive texts at least. The music bit would run off just one of the batteries.

I think they should stick two identical batteries together back to back, so they can be ejected. Two batteries capable of playing music for about 12 hours each. So, you can buy a new battery as a backup, or as a replacement. Also, if you run out of power for the music player, pull the battry out, turn it round, and shove it back in. Twelve more hours of music, and the other battery gets a chance to rest, build up some residual charge, maybe enough for a call or two, should you run down the other.

This is going to be awesome, and would be an awesome replacement of my crappy $10 motorola😀. Especially as I don't have an iPod, but would very much like one. My money is waiting, Stevie J.

PS. Don't care about camera. Any half decent camera is going to be far better than anything that could be put on an iPhone. Can't you get cords to transfer photos directly from camera to iPod anyway? I very much doubt a camera will find its way into the iPhone for quite a while yet, and if it does, I think it might be trying to do too much.

PPS. I think it would be better not to let software run the battery allocation. After all, how do you test how much juice is left in a battery? Slowly decreasing voltage? You don't want a battery to do that. I don't think a software method of controlling when the music stops playing would be nearly accurate enough, especially when you start requesting 10% or lower.

 

[wkhahn]

Two batteries ensures that you could never run down the battery using the iPod inadvertently. I'm sure they've thought of this situation. My guess? You can opt for either the player of the phone to use both the batteries should you desire.

IF this is the case then why not just one power distribution system and software to handle the split between phone/ipod? Just say how far you want to run down the battery before the ipod stops working while the phone keeps you talking. Set a bottom limit of 10% or 30 min, whichever.

 

[rtharper]

IF this is the case then why not just one power distribution system and software to handle the split between phone/ipod? Just say how far you want to run down the battery before the ipod stops working while the phone keeps you talking. Set a bottom limit of 10% or 30 min, whichever.

That's not the same thing, that's setting drainage limits. Batteries drain on their own, too. They don't hold a charge forever. They hold a different maximum charge every time. Two batteries ensures that you NEVER drain it, even inadvertently, like I said before.

 

[PODshady]

I really dig the idea of 2 batteries and that is could be used for any carrier.... I hope this if for real.... I really want an iPhone (as long as it is under $500 and will work with Cingular I will buy one)

 

[dolbinau]

I'm really looking forward to what will come. I don't think apple in recent times has ever disappointed me with a release and I'm hoping it is not about to happen! I'm also not impressed with several of the mock-up images 🙁.

 

[MuzakaEklekta]

Let's face it -

- it won't have Wi-Fi
- it won't have the anticipated iChat compatibility
- it won't be 3G compatibile
- the display will be tiny
- it won't support many fun stuff, like emulators, GPS
- it will have issues

Apple will probably test the water first with a simple model. Then, I would give it another year until they start dabbling with 3G, Video Chat, etc, and get even close to the current Pocket PC Phone Editions out there.

It's not going to be revolutionary. It will be a mobile/cell phone in white with an Apple logo... which i know many will be dissapointed with, along with its lack of bells and whistles, commonly found in the abundance of mobile devices drifting through every tech blog and teenager's hands.

I want an iPhone as much as everyone else, but other the mould the hardware comes in, it will nothing over a high-end PDA (and don't moan about them being massive. Many are compact. Read up on the current models. It's not 2001.).

Even though you may knock WM5.0/6.0, it does have a huge archive of applications for it, and has more experience in the mobile field than what Apple may give birth to in the iPhone.

Of course, there's always the thought that Apple may surprise us...

 

[Goldfinger]

It would be cool if they came out with an iPhone. But it better have a damn good battery. I'm thinking of replacing my Nokia N72 for that reason. The battery sucks (just like any Nokia's battery). No Nokia for me anymore. And the menu system is complicated and slow as molasses.
And for some reason I have a feeling that the battery performance on an iPhone will suck, iPods never had great batteries except for the latest generation.
I need something that lasts 7 days in standby. If the iPhone doesn't offer it I'm going back to Ericsson.

 

[tjcampbell]

Most flights say that you have to turn your phone off, or put it into "flight mode". This disables the wireless parts, but lets you use the calendar, mp3 player, camera, etc.

Did you know that they tested cell phones at cruising altitude and they had a
.006 percent success rate of connection.

The no phones on planes thing will be a non issue very shortly.

Cheers, Tom

 

[GregA]

Did you know that they tested cell phones at cruising altitude and they had a .006 percent success rate of connection.

I'm not sure how that relates.
Firstly... pilots use their mobile phones as backup if the radio goes down. The original problem was that the first mobile phones, when taken in a plane, tried to connect to so many towers simultaneously (and to move between those towers so quickly) that the whole phone system crashed.
Next... a GSM phone causes the most interference when it is attempting to connect to a tower. That's when you hear the stuttering sounds on your radio if it's near the phone - so a bad rate of connection would actually be the worst time. It also drains the battery quicker. (CDMA & 3GSM phones don't stutter like that)
Lastly... I really don't believe a phone will cause any problems when flying... It's just the rule of the airline. And whether I'm right or not, if the airline says "no phone" then you'll need a "flight mode" on any iPhone.

The no phones on planes thing will be a non issue very shortly.

I'd like to see it happen, but why do you say it'll be a non-issue?

 

[sivancotel]

No, you'll have an extra $50. The $50 you place counts as an expenditure until you win, then you get a hundred which cancels out the original money you spent on the bet and gives you $50 profit.

It would need to pay 3:1 for you to get $100 profit.

your logic is correct, but that's just not how betting terminology works. when you bet $50 at 2:1, that means if you lose you lose $50, if you win you get twice your bet ($100) plus your original bet back ($50). so you get $150 back, for a gain of $100. your numbers are spot on, soif you think about it we're in total agreement.

so yes, bet $50 on the iPhone being announced at macworld in january, and if it is announced, win $100 towards buying one (plus your original $50 back).

 

[peharri]

A handset launching towards the end of the 1st quarter 07 would already be undergoing testing and development by the networks it's launching on.

Only if it's being sold by those networks. If it's being sold SIM free, the networks don't really need to care. And, while it may be true that some CDMA2000 networks will block "unknown" phones, that just doesn't happen in the GSM/UMTS world, with the exception of the examples I gave.

Whether this is the same for the US market I'm not sure but in my experience it's the case in the UK. In regards to blocking, if an Apple phone poses any problem for the networks they can block IMEI ranges and say it's unsupported on their network. An example of this in practise would be - you take a 3G handset and put it's USIM into a 2G handset not sold by the network, within a few days you will get a message warning you the handset is unsupported and will be blocked.

Has this actually happened to you? If you're roaming, you may want to use a 2G handset. The issue here, in any case, is the person has an incompatible phone given their priceplan (and, in the case of UMTS-only networks like Three, their network.) The type of technology, not the phone itself is the cause of the blockage.

For the timescales and internal testing involved, a new handset that is identical to a currently sold one, but in a different colour, will often have to go through all of the internal testing again for power outputs etc, because of varying metal content within the paints, a totally new handset will take quite some time to be officially supported. I'm sure some networks aren't concerned with any old phone working on their network but there are some that definitely are.

Again, this really doesn't happen. Sure, GSM operators will fully test a phone before selling it themselves, but this is entirely different to blocking phones that they haven't tested. In some countries, notably all of those in the EU, this would be illegal as it violates the personal mobility part of the GSM mandate.

The only instance I can see where a regular GSM operator would block a regular GSM phone is if the phone itself has a broken design and doesn't meet the GSM specification. Likewise, the only instance I can see where a regular UMTS operator would block a regular UMTS phone is if the phone itself has a broken design and doesn't meet the UMTS specification for their supported AI technology (W-CDMA, TD-CDMA)

Blocking a phone because they haven't tested it themselves is a surefire way to have the EU kick them. It serves no purpose at all, and prevents people from being able to use the technology of their chosing. Realistically, a GSM iPhone, whether it's sold by an operator or bought SIM free directly from Apple will, unless Apple actually has flaws in the fundamental design, not be blocked by any GSM operator.

 

[lmalave]

Let's face it -

- it won't have Wi-Fi
- it won't have the anticipated iChat compatibility
- it won't be 3G compatibile
- the display will be tiny
- it won't support many fun stuff, like emulators, GPS
- it will have issues

Apple will probably test the water first with a simple model. Then, I would give it another year until they start dabbling with 3G, Video Chat, etc, and get even close to the current Pocket PC Phone Editions out there.

It's not going to be revolutionary. It will be a mobile/cell phone in white with an Apple logo... which i know many will be dissapointed with, along with its lack of bells and whistles, commonly found in the abundance of mobile devices drifting through every tech blog and teenager's hands.

I want an iPhone as much as everyone else, but other the mould the hardware comes in, it will nothing over a high-end PDA (and don't moan about them being massive. Many are compact. Read up on the current models. It's not 2001.).

Even though you may knock WM5.0/6.0, it does have a huge archive of applications for it, and has more experience in the mobile field than what Apple may give birth to in the iPhone.

Of course, there's always the thought that Apple may surprise us...

I disagree. I think 3G at launch is a MUST. I really think that the iPhones will have a mobile interface to the iTunes store. Apple has a lot of expertise by now at making small devices. And Apple has put fantastic screens on its iPods - why do you think they'd skimp on the iPhone?

The Wi-Fi and iChat I'm less sure about, but again I don't see why you have such little faith in Apple. Apple has ALL the ingredients: experience with tiny music players, experience with tiny cameras (e.g. iSight on the MacBooks), extensive experience with wireless technologies (e.g. wi-fi, bluetooth). True, Apple is completely untested in the mobile phone arena, but why do you assume that their first effort will have issues? Even though the iPhone is a more complicated device, I don't expect it to have any more "issues" than the initial iPod launch.

 

[xloveaffliction]

iPhone available in Apple Stores?

if the iPhone is going to be available to all providers, wouldnt the simplest thing (and most lucrative) for apple to do is simply sell the unlocked iPhone in its retail stores, in both CDMA and GSM flavors?

 

[charkshark]

I disagree. I think 3G at launch is a MUST. I really think that the iPhones will have a mobile interface to the iTunes store. Apple has a lot of expertise by now at making small devices. And Apple has put fantastic screens on its iPods - why do you think they'd skimp on the iPhone?

The Wi-Fi and iChat I'm less sure about, but again I don't see why you have such little faith in Apple. Apple has ALL the ingredients: experience with tiny music players, experience with tiny cameras (e.g. iSight on the MacBooks), extensive experience with wireless technologies (e.g. wi-fi, bluetooth). True, Apple is completely untested in the mobile phone arena, but why do you assume that their first effort will have issues? Even though the iPhone is a more complicated device, I don't expect it to have any more "issues" than the initial iPod launch.

I agree that 3G, AT LAUNCH is a definite must. A "Mini OS X" interface is what I believe to be the biggest upside of this phone, aside from iPod functonality which i think is secondary to a majority of users. iChat with AV support FOR SURE. I agree the camera will likely be an almost identical or smaller with identical specs as the iSights on the macbooks. Bluetooth is another definite MUST, even most mid- high end phones have Bluetooth. Wi-Fi I am doubtful of. I have heard rumors of Apple already being in production of a revised iPhone for release a few months after the original, maybe this phone will have Wi-Fi functionality? I also think there will be both CDMA & GPRS functionality unlocked for use on ALL networks throughout north america, possibly even a world phone?

It's a little far fetched but I think there is a chance of touchscreen almost PDA-like functionality.

There will be issues, probably less than the majority of first gen products though it is far more complex than the iPod at original launch.