Next Gen iPhone: 802.11n and Video Editing?

[napabar]

In the case of iPhone V3.0, we are finally seeing more of the features that SHOULD have been there in iPhone V1.0 and yet Apple also seems to be limiting (artificially as usual) some of the newer options to newer iPhones only, thus trying to force you upgrade to obtain them and pad their wallets some more. Dropping PPC support in Snow Leopard (despite Quad Core G5s being faster than many current dual core Intels), not allowing video capture on pre-iPhone 3.x devices and charging 30% off the top of 3rd party software (and probably soon hardware as well with the introduction of an iPod that requires a chip to control it that only Apple offers...for a price) are all signs that Apple is all about trying to recycle profits from existing customers by forcing them to capitulate and/or upgrade on Apple's time-frame, not their own needs.

Dropping PPC support is more about getting a slimmer, more efficient OS for the future. Why waste time with an architecture that is no longer produced by Apple? 10.5 ran on PPC Macs, and came out a year after the last PPC Mac was made. By the time 10.6 ships, it will be 3 years. 10.5 is bloated with twice the code to support both architectures. 10.6 will just be the beginning of "clearing out the junk". I fully expect future versions to require a 64-bit Intel chip, drop Rosetta, and eventually Carbon. This all won't happen in 10.7, but it'll be phased in. And there will be people that complain, like some did with loosing Classic, but times move fast in Tech.

Charging 30% to handle storage, advertising, and credit card transactions is a steal. Apple allows free apps. If they required paid apps only, you might have a little bit more of an argument, but not much of one.

 

[NewSc2]

I think people like you are the ones with the attitude problem. Moaning about people moaning is FAR worse than moaning about a legitimate user problem. Maybe you enjoy drinking the kool-aid Apple sells, but some of us couldn't care less about Apple, only their products. We owe no special allegiance to Apple what-so-ever. They are a particularly overly greedy corporate entity run by a megalomaniac who seems to think the end user isn't smart enough to know what's best for him so he'll decide it all for him. Apple's innovation is only matched by their greed and arrogance. I moved to Apple in part because I couldn't stand Bill Gates and his company's greed and arrogance, only to find the exact same thing with Apple, only perhaps worse.

In the case of iPhone V3.0, we are finally seeing more of the features that SHOULD have been there in iPhone V1.0 and yet Apple also seems to be limiting (artificially as usual) some of the newer options to newer iPhones only, thus trying to force you upgrade to obtain them and pad their wallets some more.

I completely disagree with your point. I bought the iPhone 2G when it first came out, and did not expect an App store, useful free software, large websites (like ESPN) to support the iPhone interface, etc.

Apple has done a lot of things to make their first gen iPhone even more than I could've ever hoped for. They never sold it as a video recording device, or a device that runs on 802.11n, and I knew that when it came out. The iPhone is not the be-all, end-all phone for all eternity, and I did expect it to suck in certain ways (I've been proved wrong in most cases). Anything Apple gives extra that's unadvertised is icing on the cake.

If you want a phone that can download files off the internet and edit Office documents, and aren't happy that the iPhone can't -- well, maybe you should seriously weigh the pros and cons between the iPhone's streamlined OS and a Blackberry. That's what you're supposed to consider.

It seems like you're the kind of person that needs to stop drinking the Apple Kool-Aid, and feel like you're being pressured by Apple to upgrade.

Yes, the 3G iPhone is faster, and has GPS, but it never really bothered me. Unless something awe-inspiring is on the upcoming iPhone, I'll probably continue to stick with my OG version (I'll admit USB tethering and 3G v2 is tempting... but 802.11n and video -- couldn't care less).

 

[Fraghax]

Not true.

Streaming HD over G to the Apple TV works perfectly fine.

I agree. HD video over G works fine. Nice HDMI cables transfer 10.2mb/s.

 

[Cravendale]

Really suprised and pleased to see even more of these improvements/features.

Whether or not they should already be implemented into the iPhone is another matter all together...

 

[Stuart in Oz]

Really enjoying these news leaks. On iPhone Day One I thought to myself that the second or third generation would probably be the sweet spot - all the little issues fixed and (probably) the price a bit more reasonable.

It seems my 2 year wait hasn't been in vain!

Well, except I spent them using a Treo 750...

 

[queshy]

Hmm, I can see Apple, in the future, slowly moving "iLife"-functionality to the iPhone. It will never be as sophisticated on such a small screen, but I wouldn't be surprised if we got "photobooth effects", simple picture editing (resizing because the integrated 3 MP camera will make photos too large to e-mail over 3G...). Maybe we'll even see "iWork for iPhone".

 

[neil1980]

I'm not actually looking forward to the new iPhone that much tbh.

All the things I've heard so far (slightly higher MP camera and wireless n) haven't interested me half as much as the whole 3.0 update has.

I dare say a steve jobs keynote on the new iPhone will make me NEEEED it but so far I'm not all that impressed unless they add some big feature thats not been talked about in 3.0 or rumored to be included so far in the update.

 

[ipoppy]

please, please; bring the ichat av along

 

[BTW]

Oh my Jihad! That will be awesome. If they give the camera high enough MP, auto-focus, and a light then the iPhone could replace some low-end video cameras.

 

[Powerbooky]

802.11n would be great, only if that is on 5 GHz too.
Plus... 64GB of flash-memory and I'm considering buying one this year.

Even sooner, if a fully functional TomTom app becomes available too.

 

[jayminer]

Why do people want wireless N? It wont make your Internet any faster, it just increases local network speeds. It also will drain a crap load more power than G.

The only advantage is it not throttling the rest of your network to G speeds.

Well, there are those of us that have 100Mbit internet...

 

[iPhoneNYC]

I have to imagine that this will all be released the end of June when those millions of first gen contracts expire...

 

[Airforcekid]

Video editing maybe adding text etc?

 

[sflocal]

Why do people want wireless N? It wont make your Internet any faster, it just increases local network speeds. It also will drain a crap load more power than G.

The only advantage is it not throttling the rest of your network to G speeds.

Think about it. You're focusing strictly with consumers. Look to the enterprise. If you're a doctor in a hospital and need to access patient records, photos, content, whatever... don't you think having that extra speed boost is better in the long run?

Realistically, most people won't see the advantages of the N-spec because their internet connection won't ever see that speed. But in the enterprise, it will be a boon for professionals in medical, financials, etc. that have access to fiber Internet connections and real LAN apps. The route Apple is taking with this, if properly implemented, could make really make waves.

 

[Airforcekid]

I'm not actually looking forward to the new iPhone that much tbh.

All the things I've heard so far (slightly higher MP camera and wireless n) haven't interested me half as much as the whole 3.0 update has.

I dare say a steve jobs keynote on the new iPhone will make me NEEEED it but so far I'm not all that impressed unless they add some big feature thats not been talked about in 3.0 or rumored to be included so far in the update.

I agree they need something to really put it ahead not just barley.

 

[Jayomat]

only question: how long will it take to hack the 3.0 software.... if we assume they aren't already up to it

 

[mikejd1]

I have to imagine that this will all be released the end of June when those millions of first gen contracts expire...

i'm curious how AT&T is going to do this. I am confused, every iphone 3G buyer bought the 3G in July last year, which means even if the new iphone is released in June/July that leaves all 3g customers with 1 year left on there contract. This is millions of people who upgraded to 3g. How is this going to work for us in a contract, because essentially a "qualified" upgrade would not include ALL 3G buyers, correct?

 

[iMacoo7]

Mobile iMovie? I wonder if other iLife apps will be made mobile.

I also wonder whether or not video editing is too intensive for the current iPhone or iPod touch.

I totally agree with you on this. I was told there are going to be a few new Apple applications (Besides the recorder application) one application that was mentioned was a chatting application.

it's been known that apple has "toned down" the speed of wifi for whatever reason. there has also been rumors that apple is going to let go of that restriction in hardware or os 3.0. I'm sure competition with the pre and android will have something to do with that.

Where is the link to this rumor you are referring to about Apple has toned down wifi as well as the statement of Apple letting go of the wifi restriction in a hardware refresh or OS 3.0......

 

[michael.lauden]

only question: how long will it take to hack the 3.0 software.... if we assume they aren't already up to it

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=dev+team+3.0+iPhone&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

they are

 

[techfreak85]

at macworld 2007, didnt steve say that the iphone had 802.11n?
im pretty sure. downloaded the keynote now.

 

[iMacoo7]

i'm curious how AT&T is going to do this. I am confused, every iphone 3G buyer bought the 3G in July last year, which means even if the new iphone is released in June/July that leaves all 3g customers with 1 year left on there contract. This is millions of people who upgraded to 3g. How is this going to work for us in a contract, because essentially a "qualified" upgrade would not include ALL 3G buyers, correct?

This is how the upgrade process works . I purchased mine in July last year(Camped out in front of the ATT store) renewed for another 2 years.
If you call ATT right now , you should have been eligible for an upgrade on any phone since the end of February/March of this year.
The upgrade stipulation for the iPhone is that if you are eligible to update/upgrade all you have to do is sign a new 2 year contract and you are good to go.
It basically depends when the person of the 3G iPhone purchased it. Hope that helps

 

[Malfoy]

better camera and n might tempt be back. More memory doesn't mean anything to me since I don't use more than 3 or 4 gbs of my 16 gigs

 

[iMacoo7]

better camera and n might tempt be back. More memory doesn't mean anything to me since I don't use more than 3 or 4 gbs of my 16 gigs

I use roughly 4 1/2 of my 16 GBs..
Reason why? The more applications & music loaded. The longer the iphone takes to boot up.
When the iPhone hits 8GB of space available, it takes it almost 2 - 3 minutes to boot up.....

 

[Chupa Chupa]

I think people like you are the ones with the attitude problem. Moaning about people moaning is FAR worse than moaning about a legitimate user problem. Maybe you enjoy drinking the kool-aid Apple sells, but some of us couldn't care less about Apple, only their products. We owe no special allegiance to Apple what-so-ever. They are a particularly overly greedy corporate entity run by a megalomaniac who seems to think the end user isn't smart enough to know what's best for him so he'll decide it all for him. Apple's innovation is only matched by their greed and arrogance. I moved to Apple in part because I couldn't stand Bill Gates and his company's greed and arrogance, only to find the exact same thing with Apple, only perhaps worse.

Heh. I think my bullet hit close to your bone. Hey, look, if you are going to pontificate and pretend you are intellectual at least use paragraphs.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Dropping PPC support is more about getting a slimmer, more efficient OS for the future. Why waste time with an architecture that is no longer produced by Apple?

I keep hearing this argument, but it's based on false/ignorant ideas. The current developer kit gives you PPC (thus Universal) code for FREE. It requires no EFFORT on the developer's part if they're using Apple's software to support PPC. So please explain to me how you figure that you are going to get a more efficient OS for the future. Once installed, the code is separate. There is no PPC OS code on your Intel Mac. So how would removing something that isn't there reduce bloat? Where is the bloat supposed to be at?

Like it or not, Apple has a responsibility to support the platforms they create. They have an open source base that I'm sure more than a few users would be glad to keep supporting the PPC core code for them. People expect more than 3 years out of a professional level machine like a Quad-G5 so "wasting" resources has a purpose. It's called support. Or do you think when Apple Care runs out after 3 years it's time to buy a new computer?

The original iPhone will be over two years old when 3.0 comes out. Would you care if 3.0 stopped supporting the original 1st generation iPhone or iPod touch based on some "bloat" idea that having to support the older hardware somehow affects your newer iPhone? Does the ARM CPU version of OS X (iPhone/Touch) somehow 'bloat' your Intel Mac also?

I fully expect future versions to require a 64-bit Intel chip, drop Rosetta, and eventually Carbon. This all won't happen in 10.7, but it'll be phased in. And there will be people that complain, like some did with loosing Classic, but times move fast in Tech.

Dropping carbon has NOTHING to do with dropping PPC. PPC machines will run Cocoa apps just fine. The G5 CPU *IS* 64-bit so you have no point to make there either. Dropping Rosetta has NO EFFECT on PPC machines (that software runs natively), but only hurts Intel machines by reducing the amount of software you can run on them. In effect, Rosetta is simply an optional emulator that is activated to run older software. Removing is a lose/lose situation for everyone involved. And if you don't run older software, it's never activated. There is no bloat here either. Dropping it will simply reduce your software base. For example, Office 2004 on Rosetta is similar in speed to Office 2008 natively on Intel. But dropping Rosetta would FORCE you to buy Office 2008 if you still need Office because Office 2004 would simply no longer run. I'm sure Microsoft would LOVE that 'feature' for Snow Leopard.

Charging 30% to handle storage, advertising, and credit card transactions is a steal. Apple allows free apps. If they required paid apps only, you might have a little bit more of an argument, but not much of one.

30% is definitely a "STEAL" IMO but I'm afraid it's Apple that is doing the "theft". Given there is no alternative store for developers to sell their apps in, their actions are bordering on racketeering, IMO. Why should "small" computers be exempt from free-market rules and Capitalistic principles? Apple's every move is to thwart competition instead of competing against its rivals. If their products and services really are the best, why don't they simply compete instead of trying to thwart/sue their would-be competitors and milk their current user base all the time?