iPod with WIFI:
...
2) It Will make those on the fence perhaps buy the WIFI iPod, instead of the iPhone....THEREFORE (drumroll)...hurting iPhone sales. And as I showed above, if Apple misses their sales mark of 10,000,000 iphones, even by .1%, hell, even by .01%, that potentially means millions of lost revenue to ATT over the next couple years.
WiFi technology is useless without being in proximity of a network. There's two parts: Part A, the WiFi technology and Part B, a network close enough to access. Both have to be present or who gives a damn -- What's great about the iPhone is that AT&T (theoretically) provides at no additional charge (!) UNLIMITED (!) email/web. Of course, this scenario is based entirely on AT&T's ability to deliver the internet to the device.
I don't believe an iPod with WiFi is going to "make those on the fence buy the iPod instead of the iPhone". And here's why:
The iPhone is a PHONE. The iPod is not a PHONE. If someone is in the market for a phone and they're on the fence, it's not because of a music player that occasionally has access to email and the internet if they happen to be in just the right spot. It's because of (a) cost of the iPhone; (b) cost of the AT&T service; (c) the service provider being AT&T; (d) limitations of the iPhone itself; (e) the competitions' great phones; (e) the competitions' great service; (f) the competitions' great pricing; (g) an expensive fee for breaking a current contract -- or a combination of two or more of these things.
What we know is that the iPhone is getting rave reviews on most every aspect. Most believe that the pricing is great and starting at $59.99*, I have to agree. If there's anything that's keeping people from buying the iPhone it's AT&T's coverage and service.
Is it the money? Well, considering your scenario, it's not money, because the would-be buyer has money for either the hardware: the iPhone or the iPod. Also, since the service contract is pretty good and right in line with most other providers and since we've kind of established that this person is in the market for a phone, it's really not an issue about money for the service.
You spoke of untold millions that AT&T and the lost revenue lost to Apple and their products? Honestly, who cares besides AT&T and their stockholders? Apple has a contract with them that prohibits them to sell the iPhone (and more likely than not, any other type of phone either) to another telephone company. Certainly, it shouldn't include a portable device that gives intermittent access to the internet. Apple already sells those: they're called laptops. Considering the iPod will run OS X, there's no reason that they won't load as much technology as they can into these things, and AT&T darn well knows this. They just care about the phone part.
And so do the fence-sitters.
--------
The following quote is from a article written by John Gruber. It details an OS X-based iPod and is an awesome read. Highly recommended...
Daring Fireball's John Gruber said:
The simple truth is that the iPhone user experience doesn’t just blow away the experience of other companies’ cell phones — it blows away the experience of Apple’s own iPods. The biggest question, as I see it, is whether Apple plans to introduce iPods that are more or less just the iPod app from the iPhone (i.e. just music and video players), or iPods that are everything but phones, with Wi-Fi networking for email, web, and more.
(read more)... "Regarding OS X-Based iPods"
* 450 weekly minutes •*Unlimited email & web • Built-in visual voicemail • 200 texts • 5000 nights & weekend minutes • Rollover minutes • Unlimited mobile to mobile
