The New York Times Tears iPhone (and Apple/AT&T) A New One

[Prof.]

The New York Times
For iPhone, the ‘New’ Is Relative​

There is, however, a catch: you don’t get that speed or those features unless you’re in one of AT&T’s 3G network areas — and there aren’t many of them. The 3G coverage map at wireless.att.com/coverageviewer (zoom in and turn on “View 3G/Mobile Broadband Coverage” below the map) reveals that in 16 states, only three cities or fewer are covered; 10 states have no coverage at all. (Tip: Whenever you’re outside of a 3G area, turning off the iPhone’s 3G feature doubles the battery’s talk time, to 10 hours from 5.)

But the iPhone 3G is not really, as Apple’s Web site puts it, “half the price.” The basic AT&T plan — unlimited Internet and 450 minutes of calling — now costs $70 a month instead of $60 (plus taxes and fees), and comes with no text messages instead of 200. (Adding text messaging costs at least $5 a month more.)

Unfortunately, most of the standard cellphone features that were missing from the first iPhone are still missing. There’s still no voice dialing, video recording, copy-and-paste, memory-card slot, Bluetooth stereo audio or phone-to-phone photo sending (MMS). And when the battery needs replacement after a couple of years, you’ll still have to pay Apple $86 for a replacement.

View Story
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The New York Times​

Apple’s Toy, and Other Thoughts​

What is it with Steven P. Jobs and batteries? On Friday, Apple’s new iPhone went on sale (for a mere $199; how does that make you early adopters feel who stood in line last year for the privilege of plunking down three times that amount? Just wondering.) In their reviews of the new device this week, both The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal pointed out that the iPhone’s battery problem had gotten worse in the new iteration.

The original iPhone, you may recall, got “8 hours of talk time, 6 hours of Internet use, 7 hours of video playback or 24 hours of audio playback and more than 10 days of standby time,” to quote Apple’s public relations mantra. There were two catches, however. To get that long battery life, Apple had to forgo high speed wireless 3G, which chews up batteries. Second, if the battery did run down during the day, you couldn’t just swap it out for your backup battery, as you can with just about every other smartphone. The iPhone case was sealed tight. Looked cooler that way.

The new iPhone, of course, has wireless 3G — indeed, that appears to be the biggest improvement in the new model. And sure enough, it’s a battery-killer; according to The Journal reviewer, Walter S. Mossberg, the new iPhone battery lasts only about four and a half hours before it needs a new charge. Yet Apple still insists on sealing the case, thus preventing customers from using a spare battery when it runs down. For heavy cellphone users—and who isn’t these days?—the battery is going to need a charge by lunchtime. Good luck with that. Unless Apple does something about its battery problem, the iPhone will always be more a toy than a tool.

View Story
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

iPhone 3G BIGGEST problems?

1. Horrible battery life compared to the previous gen.
2. You can NOT swap out the battery when the battery being used dies.

AT&T's BIGGEST problem?

1. There are not a lot of locations that have a 3G network.
2. Plans are just too expensive for what you (don't) get.

Man, that took forever to edit and post.

 

[EricNau]

And yet, it's still the hottest phone on the market.

 

[JBaker122586]

"according to The Journal reviewer, Walter S. Mossberg, the new iPhone battery lasts only about four and a half hours before it needs a new charge"

This is completely untrue, and in fact, libelous.

Of course, I stopped expecting the NYT to print facts quite a while ago.

 

[alFR]

the second guy is an idiot. Name me one person who talks on their cellphone for more than 4 hours before lunch - you'd have to be at work at 8am and talk constantly thus not actually doing any work.

 

[superstacker717]

i think people need to stop comparing the iPhone to normal cell phones when it comes to battery life. instead i compare it to my laptop battery. im lucky to get 2 full hours of usage out of my laptop. when you think about what you actually do on an iPhone compared to a "normal phone" its understandable why you dont get anywhere near the battery life. the last phone i had that wasnt an iphone was a moto razor. i liked the phone but what did i use it for? to make calls and send texts. so going one sometimes two days without charging it was normal. what do i do on my iPhone? 10 times more things than on the razor. No one seems to realize that this is not "just a phone" it is a MOBILE COMPUTING DEVICE! If i ONLY had to charge my computer twice a day i would be VERY happy. so why are people so upset when they have to charge their iPhone more than once a day?

 

[Petey05]

This is completely untrue, and in fact, libelous.

you don't know what libel is

 

[Prof.]

So why are people so upset when they have to charge their iPhone more than once a day?

The fact that you can't replace the battery yourself when it reaches the end of its cycle and have to pay 86 dollars to have it replaced.

 

[GfPQqmcRKUvP]

so why are people so upset when they have to charge their iPhone more than once a day?

Because we all don't have access to outlets throughout the day (most do, including me) and we don't have to lug around/buy extra chargers.


Personally, I don't have a big problem with it. But on plane rides longer than 4 hours, I don't know what I'll do...

 

[EricNau]

But on plane rides longer than 4 hours, I don't know what I'll do...

Considering your phone is off for the duration of the flight, you'll get up to 24 hours of music or up to 7 hours of video. That's about all your iPhone is good for in-flight.

http://www.apple.com/iphone/specs.html

 

[jimN]

Personally, I don't have a big problem with it. But on plane rides longer than 4 hours, I don't know what I'll do...

On airplane mode you can watch video for more than 4 hours, or certainly that has been my experience with the device (the older iPhone which is supposed to have poorer battery life). You could always try bringing a book on the flight!

 

[skwoytek]

I love how Pogue emphasizes, that the plan is going to cost more and essentially iPhone 3G owners are paying more. Yet, Joe Nocera emphasizes that 1st generation owners got screwed by paying more for the phone.

As a side note, I'm sick of Pogue and anyone else who claims that iPhone is not "half the price." By their logic, the voice should have dropped from $40 to $20 and data from $20 to $10. We all knew that wasn't going to happen, so why do they insist that the cost of Apple's device must be lumped with the cost of AT&T's service. We all knew AT&T wasn't halving their service charges... Sure, the two are paired. But, each sets the price for their portion.

I also love that journalists complained about the lack of 3G while the 1st generation iPhone gave a great experience with great battery life. Now we get 3G and people complain that the battery life sucks and there's no coverage.

Duh. Pick one, oh right that doesn't get page hits...

 

[JBaker122586]

you don't know what libel is

"When an individual or company brings a libel or slander action, they must show that the words are defamatory of them.
A statement may be considered to be defamatory if it tends to lower the claimant in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally."

Considering the text of the article claims that the iPhone only gets 4.5 hours of battery life (without ever noting that is TALK time), and then wrongfully attributes that information to Walt Mossberg (who did himself, in the WSJ article, clarify that it had 4.5 hours 3G talk time), it can be construed as libelous against Apple. The average consumer (general society) could choose not to purchase the iPhone because they believe it to only last 4.5 hours after being unplugged, no matter the usage.

That doesn't even bring into account the fact that on standard GSM or EDGE, the iPhone 3G gets 10 hours of talk time.

Personally, I don't have a big problem with it. But on plane rides longer than 4 hours, I don't know what I'll do...

I believe they sell an airplane charging accessory.



And I'm really tired of hearing people say the iPhone lacks "typical cell phone features" including "copy/paste." Please, someone show me how to copy and paste on my Motorola Razr (AKA the most typical cell phone in the world). Copy/paste is in no way a typical cell phone feature.

 

[Aea]

To be honest the ATT price gouging (I know, I don't know what the word means, thank you) is what is turning me off from it. Hell, I wouldn't mind paying $500 for the iPhone if I could use it on any network.

 

[byron_hinson]

"according to The Journal reviewer, Walter S. Mossberg, the new iPhone battery lasts only about four and a half hours before it needs a new charge"

This is completely untrue, and in fact, libelous.

Of course, I stopped expecting the NYT to print facts quite a while ago.

Rubbish - it's not libelous - for a start people have to prove him wrong, my battery time on the 3G iphone is pretty damn poor so I'll agree with him completely there - as would many others in this forum if you read though the battery questions

 

[byron_hinson]

"When an individual or company brings a libel or slander action, they must show that the words are defamatory of them.
A statement may be considered to be defamatory if it tends to lower the claimant in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally."

Considering the text of the article claims that the iPhone only gets 4.5 hours of battery life (without ever noting that is TALK time), and then wrongfully attributes that information to Walt Mossberg (who did himself, in the WSJ article, clarify that it had 4.5 hours 3G talk time), it can be construed as libelous against Apple. The average consumer (general society) could choose not to purchase the iPhone because they believe it to only last 4.5 hours after being unplugged, no matter the usage.

That doesn't even bring into account the fact that on standard GSM or EDGE, the iPhone 3G gets 10 hours of talk time.




I believe they sell an airplane charging accessory.



And I'm really tired of hearing people say the iPhone lacks "typical cell phone features" including "copy/paste." Please, someone show me how to copy and paste on my Motorola Razr (AKA the most typical cell phone in the world). Copy/paste is in no way a typical cell phone feature.

He didn't quote talk time because for some of us 5 hours is all we get whether talking or not - push email kills the battery time, thats not talk time.

 

[Michael CM1]

"according to The Journal reviewer, Walter S. Mossberg, the new iPhone battery lasts only about four and a half hours before it needs a new charge"

This is completely untrue, and in fact, libelous.

Of course, I stopped expecting the NYT to print facts quite a while ago.

Before you talk outta your anus, maybe you should, um, read. From Mossberg's review on the WSJ Web site:

"Apple claims that over 3G, the new iPhone can get five hours of talk time, or five hours of Internet use. Talk time is twice as long on the older EDGE network, and Internet time is an hour better with Wi-Fi.

I ran my own battery tests using the phone's 3G capability. Although I left the Wi-Fi function on, I didn't connect it to a network, so the phone had to rely on 3G. In my test of voice calling, I got 4 hours and 27 minutes, short of Apple's maximum claim and nearly three hours less than what I recorded in the same test last year on the original iPhone. In my test of Internet use over 3G, I got 5 hours and 49 minutes, better than Apple's claim, but far short of the nine hours I got using Wi-Fi in last year's tests.

More important, in daily use, I found the battery indicator on the new 3G model slipping below 20% by early afternoon or midafternoon on some days, and it entirely ran out of juice on one day. I overcame this problem by learning to use Wi-Fi instead of 3G whenever possible, turning down the screen brightness and even turning off 3G altogether, which the phone permits.

The iPhone 3G's battery life is comparable to, or better than, that of some other 3G competitors. But they have replaceable batteries. The iPhone doesn't."



I coulda just posted the part killing your "libelous" statement, but it was way more fun this way. How the heck you came up with "libelous" is beyond me. The writer said Mossberg said "about four and a half hours" for battery life.

</touchdown dance>

 

[Michael CM1]

And I'm really tired of hearing people say the iPhone lacks "typical cell phone features" including "copy/paste." Please, someone show me how to copy and paste on my Motorola Razr (AKA the most typical cell phone in the world). Copy/paste is in no way a typical cell phone feature.

Do the touchscreen phones for other carriers have cut/paste? I don't think I've ever seen anybody address that. If they do, then there's a pretty good gripe. Otherwise, it's something that hasn't been figured out for touch devices yet.

In the same comparisons, I always get agitated when all the stuff it lacks get pointed out yet the fact that it's a frickin' iPod gets left out. I mean who would buy the iPhone if not for the iPod functionality in it? It's obvious, but I don't think it really gets mentioned as a major positive because of the...obviousity? It's obviously flawed, but it sure beats all those other phones I used before.

 

[hierobryan]

referring to the OP's NYT quotes:

1. I'm in Hawaii. 3G is everywhere thank you very much.
2. Price? Don't care. I don't talk much; I don't text much. Though I do love the iPhone much.
3. Voice dialing? Don't need it. I never used it even when I had it.
4. Memory card slot? WTF for!? I have 16GB of space and a USB cable. Why would I want a stupid removable memory card? So I can waste my time with other unnecessary **** like USB memory card readers? No thanks. Even in my other phones I never ever took out the memory cards...I just connected the USB cable to do file transfers.
5. MMS? Never used it when I had it. A useless feature (at least for me). If I want to send a picture I'll email it.
6. Non removable battery? I never ever removed batteries from past cellphones. I'll gladly pay $86 in a year or two, but I probably won't need to because I'll have a brand new version 3 iPhone.

Video recording and copy-and-paste are the ONLY things missing in my opinion, and those two things aren't that big of a deal anyway.

 

[marksman]

Unfortunately, most of the standard cellphone features that were missing from the first iPhone are still missing. There’s still no voice dialing, video recording, copy-and-paste, memory-card slot, Bluetooth stereo audio or phone-to-phone photo sending (MMS). And when the battery needs replacement after a couple of years, you’ll still have to pay Apple $86 for a replacement.

First of all this is very funny because the NYTimes has one of the first apps for the phone.

But to pick a few nits, since when were video recording and copy-and-paste standard cell phone features?

Edit: As of now Pogue has zero credibility with me anyways, ever since his stupid pronouncements about the GPS in the phone.
Mossberg I guess feeling left out of being an idiot, is trying to make up ground.

I am pretty sure nobody expected MORE talk time from 3G a year after Jobs said they could not provide it because it used up too much battery. I think any of us rational and informed people knew that the battery usage might be less. That being said almost everyone is at a building with electricity or in a car, all suitable places for throwing a charge on. All you need is a USB cable and a computer for crying out loud. I can't imagine Mossberg is ever away from his desk longer than it takes to get to the donut store and back, so his phone should be on 95% charged all the time.

 

[mkrishnan]

This is completely untrue, and in fact, libelous.

At least one of our members is reporting a similar experience...

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/519830/

... so at the minimum, it's quite possible that Mossberg got one like our member did.... Of course, I didn't read Mossberg's article, and I wasn't sure if he was talking about talk time or combined time.

 

[rgbyhkr]

The NYT, or any reviewer, certainly has the basis to compare the iPhone to other devices and point out its deficiencies. Going further to emphasize those deficiencies when compared to the retail price of the hardware and the associated plan pricing is also valid. For those that review lots of handsets, I can completely understand the knit-picking of the iPhone for what it doesn't do.

With all that being said, none of those shortfalls, even collectively, amount to a product failing. Heck, go ahead and tack on this week's multiple SNAFUs by Apple and AT&T. Throw in the MobileMe up/down game as well and you still don't have enough to prevent the iPhone from being a success. The only question is whether they meet analyst expectations of certain quantity of unit sales by certain time periods after launch.

We all know Apple is a master at marketing. They take their products and make them ultra-desirable. Personally, I think the move to cut off supply over a month before 3G launch was brilliant. The aggressive move to get carrier partners around the globe was also very smart. These folks are in the game to win it, and they are doing a good job.

At the end of the day, all these negatives can't take away from what Apple has done. That simply is creating a high cost phone that average people are willing out shell out for. Microsoft and its hardware partners have not been able to get deep penetration of the SP/PPC platform outside of the corporate world (and I say this as a long time, non-corporate PPC phone user). Designs like HTC's Diamond are trying to make inroads with completely skinned user interfaces that cover up teh ugliness of WM but still, it's a hard sell to many folks. For all its incredible success and religious use, RIM has similar limitations with the Crackberry. Palm is trying to rebound with the Centro, but the issues are the same.

With the first gen iPhone and the lack of subsidies, Apple was never going to infringe upon selling the quantities that other ridiculously successful handsets have. However, Apple may not exactly want a result where the hardware becomes that devalued that it is given away in 2 for 1 deals. They work hard at creating a market where customers perceive higher values for their hardware. They can and will make a killing even if they don't sell RAZR quantities. As Motorola is proving now and Nokia before it, extreme volume of handset sales doesn't guarantee long-term profit making in this market segment. Apple changed buying habits in the portable music player category and are staring to do the same now in the handset market.

 

[Tipsy]

But to pick a few nits, since when were video recording and copy-and-paste standard cell phone features?

Of the 83 models (27 unreleased) of Nokia mobile phone currently listed on their website, 68 (21 unreleased) of them support video recording.

Similarly, from a quick glance, it would seem that all of Nokia's mid-level and higher phones from 2005 onwards have had copy and paste functionality through the Symbian S60 OS.

I don't desperately need a high quality, high resolution camera, or video recording, or MMS, or for that matter cut and paste - but I find it unsatisfactory that a phone that costs so much - and it does cost a lot including the monthly contract, particularly if you're currently a reasonably low volume user like me - does not have this functionality. It's a little galling when the last three features are now pretty much universal across mid-range mobile phones. One day somebody will send me an MMS which I won't be able to open, or I'll want to copy some text, or something will be going on which I'd love to be able to take a video of - and I won't be able to with an iPhone.

I understand that for many people here, Apple is their favourite technology company and they want to protect them from what seem like frivolous complaints - but in the meantime, Apple skip over expected features. The iPhone clearly has strengths beyond it's spec sheet - the user interface and ease-of-use is why I would want one - but Apple need to bring it in line with other phones in terms of features before truly claiming its crown as 'King of Phones'.

 

[Kadman]

I love how Pogue emphasizes, that the plan is going to cost more and essentially iPhone 3G owners are paying more. Yet, Joe Nocera emphasizes that 1st generation owners got screwed by paying more for the phone.

As a side note, I'm sick of Pogue and anyone else who claims that iPhone is not "half the price." By their logic, the voice should have dropped from $40 to $20 and data from $20 to $10. We all knew that wasn't going to happen, so why do they insist that the cost of Apple's device must be lumped with the cost of AT&T's service. We all knew AT&T wasn't halving their service charges... Sure, the two are paired. But, each sets the price for their portion.

I also love that journalists complained about the lack of 3G while the 1st generation iPhone gave a great experience with great battery life. Now we get 3G and people complain that the battery life sucks and there's no coverage.

Duh. Pick one, oh right that doesn't get page hits...

It's not "half the price". Take this example: For quite some time (may still be around, but I haven't seen it in the past few years) companies would offer their employees "free" or deeply discounted computers. In exchange, they simply had to use AOL (others did this as well) as their ISP for two or even three years. It sounded great, but if you did the math, you were actually paying higher than retail for the PC in the end.

This situation is very similar. The total cost of ownership is something to be viewed from the consumer's point of view. It doesn't matter what goes to Apple's pockets vs AT&T's pockets. What's important is how much is leaving the consumer's pockets. In the end, the two year cost of the new phone is greater than the two year cost of the old phone. Yes, the service is superior (so long as you live in a 3G area) and I wish they would focus on that aspect more. It's costs a bit more to own, but it's superior technology. Great, that's why I bought mine! But that's now how Apple is positioning it. The "half the price" part is the cornerstone of the marketing for this device and it's just a flat out lie.

 

[Aiphanes]

The nokia phones are very expensive...some are close to $1000.

Apple wii get us video recording one day...and MMS and copy and past. That is all people really want.

But everything else on teh Iphone 3G is 100 times beter than any other phone

Show me a 3G phone that has better battery life than the iphone 3g?

Also if you live in teh country you will note get ATT 3g...suck it up and move back to the city or get a sprint instinct...Sprint alwasy had the better 3G network. Once reason why the first Iphone was not 3g was becasue ATT had no 3G network then. They barly have one now...but it will be much bigger in the next few months because they now have so many customers buying the iphone 3g..they are makign a killing and can now afford to upgrade the rest of the network....hopefully

http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer/

 

[zub3qin]

Also if you live in teh country you will note get ATT 3g...suck it up and move back to the city or get a sprint instinct...Sprint alwasy had the better 3G network. Once reason why the first Iphone was not 3g was becasue ATT had no 3G network then. They barly have one now...but it will be much bigger in the next few months because they now have so many customers buying the iphone 3g..they are makign a killing and can now afford to upgrade the rest of the network....hopefully

http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer/

Except that while AT&T is trying to upgrade to the 3G network, Sprint is upgrading to WiMax... already live in a few cities in the US. AT&T needs to stop playing catch-up. 3G is dead in a year.

Even now, 3G is too slow, if you are used to Wifi.