Mass media catching on that new iphone IS NOT cheaper

[gloss]

If not, then it's still being treated like a different beast and I say we flood some inboxes with requests for at least the 200 txt msgs back. I understand that 3G requires investment by AT&T and that we are probably going to be using up a ridiculous amount of bandwidth as soon as we get our hands on this puppy!

Hate to tell you, but adding 200 text messages back would be treating iPhone 'like a different beast'. Unless, of course, they did the same for all the other smartphones.

What's annoying people here, apparently, is not being treated differently, it's being treated the same.

 

[Sweetbike40]

The nerve of them, making a cell phone that is useless without cellular service.

I wish they would give you the option to not buy the data/internet service. I know, i know...what good is it without it. It would be great for me. Still use it like the Touch as far as finding Wi-Fi plus have a phone and all the software. That would be ideal. I don't have a media package now. But they force you to buy one with the iPhone. I guess they do this with any smartphone.

 

[macmadandproud]

One thing that I don't get:

everyone keeps saying how we now "get the same treatment as everyone else" and how that means $30 for data and at least $5 more for 200 texts... yet according to At&t, they have yet to announce their "iPhone plans"

Doesn't this seem to suggest that there are going to be "iPhone plans"? Assuming this to be correct, we are not being treated like everyone else. My guess is that they will end up bundling the 200 sms in with the plan, and the whole thing will cost $30, which bearing in mind the new speeds... seems tolerably fair.

I mean, does At&t have Nokia plans, or Sony Ericsson plans??

Thoughts?

 

[gloss]

I mean, does At&t have Nokia plans, or Sony Ericsson plans??

Thoughts?

They have a Blackberry data plan at $35 a month.

 

[drchipinski]

How is it a blatant lie to say the iPhone is cheaper? They didn't talk about the contract price at all during the keynote. Want to know why? AT&T isn't the carrier for the iPhone world wide. There are other carriers. Some carriers are actually giving away iPhones for free with certain contracts. Why didn't Apple say that?

It is a blatant lie. The cost of the the phone which you must get service for is more expensive. The also, made the phone cheaper by eliminating the dock, and converting the back to plastic.

The $15 would not be a big deal, if Apple did not cheapen the phone.

 

[smiddlehurst]

wow you have completely missed the point. the point im trying to make has nothing to do with the argument over who caused the increase in price over the plan. The point is that steve said in his keynote that the iphone is cheaper than the old one, WHICH IS A BLATANT LIE. we have no options to which carriers we can use, and we have to sign the two year contract. and over the course of two years, the new iphone COSTS MORE THAN THE OLD ONE.

i personally expected the price hike. i don't know how people expected to upgrade from edge to 3g and not pay more per month. my problem was that steve deceived everyone with his "the iphone is now more affordable" lie.

No it's not a "blatant lie", at least from my point of view in the UK. Over here the price plans haven't changed at all, in fact they've added a £30 plan as well (albeit with a pretty drastic cutting of free minutes but still it's there if anyone wants it). We get the 8Gb for £99 which is even cheaper than the US price as that includes all sales taxes. And they're also making it available on pay as you go for those that don't want / need a contract although prices aren't available for that option yet.

As for it being more expensive in America, you've shifted from a GPRS network to a 3G network which, as far as I understand it, is still pretty new. You're not paying for the same servces so a slight monthly increase from the service provider is to be expected. The price of the hardware has come down which is what the bulk of people were complaining about so in the context of the stevenote it is indeed cheaper. End of story.

 

[gloss]

It is a blatant lie. The cost of the the phone which you must get service for is more expensive. The also, made the phone cheaper by eliminating the dock, and converting the back to plastic.

The $15 would not be a big deal, if Apple did not cheapen the phone.

So you're implying a more feature-rich phone with better reception is 'cheapened' because it's not using a radio-damping metal enclosure?

Just checking.

 

[smiddlehurst]

It is a blatant lie. The cost of the the phone which you must get service for is more expensive. The also, made the phone cheaper by eliminating the dock, and converting the back to plastic.

The $15 would not be a big deal, if Apple did not cheapen the phone.

*sigh*

I must apologise for this, you're far from the first to suggest that Apple made the switch to plastic purely for cost reasons so this is really directed at everyone that keeps posting this rubbish.

Look at the first iPhone, see that square of black plastic on the back cover? That's there to make sure you get decent connectivity on the GPRS / GSM and wireless radios. From all reports it wasn't the best solution in the world as signal strength was a bit of an issue in some cases.

Now look at the specs for the new iPhone. Still has the GSM radio and the wireless radio but with an additional 3G radio AND GPS as well. Hence the change to the plastic back, a practical consideration rather than just a cost saving exercise. I'm not saying it couldn't have worked with a metal case, but it probably wouldn't have been as good in terms of reception / lock-on. Personally I'm a fan of the change, really like both the black and the white plastic finishes and think it actually gives a slightly more unified design on the black model at least.

 

[BongoBanger]

I think Jobs has been quite clever in what he's said. Clearly the iPhone will cost more than the £99 or £159 O2 are asking for and I guess we'll find out how much next week when they release their PAYG terms.

So he's not lied exactly but he's not saying what it really costs either.

Clever!

Oh and one thing on IM vs SMS...

IM isn't 'better' because SMS is usually used for short conversations where you don't want to 'phone or just want to leave a message for an individual or group. They're different tools for different jobs.