Apple's iPhone the No. 4 U.S. handset during third quarter

[AppleInsider]

Apple Inc.'s iPhone ranked No. 4 amongst all U.S. handset for the third calendar quarter of 2007 in terms of sales and is on track to potentially take over the No. 1 spot sometime in the next two quarters, according to a new report.

Data released Friday by global research and consulting firm Strategy Analytics projects that nearly 1.1 million units of the sleek touch-screen handset were delivered to U.S. consumers through the combined AT&T and Apple outlets during the third quarter, totaling 1.325 million units since its launch late in the second quarter.

Barry Gilbert, VP of the Strategy Analytics BuyerTRAX programs, said in the report that iPhone has emerged as AT&T’s top selling device, commanding some 13 percent of the wireless provider's overall handset sales, and the 4th top selling handset in the U.S. market.

"Although the iPhone hasn’t had an expansionary impact in the market, the iPhone has quickly assumed a leading market share position and raised the ante for smart devices," he wrote. "The sales trajectory we are observing with the iPhone could make it the top selling device in the U.S. over the next 1-2 quarters."

Currently, the top selling handset in the U.S. continues to be Motorola’s RAZR V3, however it appears to be losing momentum as new and more competitive models that erode both its share and popularity are being introduced. Strategy Analytics noted that the top 10 handset models account for approximately 25 percent of total handset sales in a typical quarter despite an increasing number of device offerings.

"The typical iPhone buyer is upwardly mobile, college educated with a six-figure household income," said David Kerr, Vice President of the Strategy Analytics Global Wireless Practice. "While the largest percentage of iPhone buyers is between 20-30 years old, the fact that nearly 25 percent were between 50-60 years old demonstrates that the device attracts buyers across a broad age spectrum."

Thus far, iPhone users are quite satisfied with the phone's design and features, Kerr added. However, they are slightly less enamored of actual iPhone reliability, battery life, documentation and customer support.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ] (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=3328)

[ Digg this story ] (http://digg.com/apple/Apple_s_iPhone_the_No_4_U_S_handset_during_third_q uarter)

[DeaPeaJay]

What's wrong with the reliability, battery life, documentation (LOADS of it) and customer support?

Where did he get that from? I'm curious.

[nothowie]

Yea, there is always room for improvement, but the iphone is the best device I have ever purchased and I have purchased many a electronic device in my lifetime and I'm one of the 50 year olds they referenced.

Everyone I show it to loves it..as it exceeds the hype the media and Apple gave it.

[studiomusic]

My daughter is on her 4th iphone... lots of reliability problems with hers. My wife's and mine are still going strong. No battery life problems either - never been below half charge.
Customer support has been A+ as usual for Apple.
Maybe a little FUD spin on the good news?

[Ireland]

Well it's certainly the coolest phone on the market, with the most potential too. 2008 is the real year for the iPhone, it will tell a lot.


Not to mention iPhone nano, when that comes out:
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1195/718518654_1527b4bcb1_o.png

Take the existing look of the iPhone, same 3 sensors, same materials, same glass front, same aluminum back with chrome Apple logo, and the same black plastic bottom to cover the antennas.

Now, remove all 5 internet functions; stocks, maps, weather, Mail and Safari, and reduce the size of the screen from 3 1/2" to about 2 3/4", and reduce the size of the phone accordingly. As the screen is smaller than the iPhone, and it's not a smartphone, it will NOT have a QWERTY keyboard, but rather a T9 software equivalent like the Prada phone has.

Some people have suggested the iPhone is not a "smartphone", well the iPhone nano is definitely not a smartphone. It's an iPod that can make calls, send texts, and take snaps--all with a cool multi-touch UI under a full screen of glass. Oh, and yes it does video. 4GB and 8GB versions which should retail for about $249 and $349 respectively.

Apple may even choose at a point to add QWERTY functionality. When in T9 keyboard mode, you turn the iPhone nano to landscape and you have a QWERTY horizontal keyboard, using software and the internal sensor. The resulting QWERTY keyboard would even be slightly bigger than the vertical one on the regular iPhone. Current iPhone owners need not worry though, as Apple should add that horizontal keyboard to most, if not all iPhone apps over time.

In Summery: No Edge, no 3G, no Wifi, no internet. Just an iPod and a phone, but with the same iPhone-like multi-touch user-interface. And yes, it comes in colors! ;)

[ThinkExpensive]

I think this is a great position for any smartphone to be in, especially considering the fact that the free / stylish flip phones will probably always be in the top few positions. Considering the iPhone only launched last June, which people tend to forget, this is amazing news.

[walshbj]

What's wrong with the reliability, battery life, documentation (LOADS of it) and customer support?

Where did he get that from? I'm curious.
He said "slightly"

[macinthe408]

Someone please, please post that quote from the (Palm?) CEO deriding Apple's ability to just come in and change the smartphone industry overnight.

[MacVicta]

Someone please, please post that quote from the (Palm?) CEO deriding Apple's ability to just come in and change the smartphone industry overnight."Is Apple serious competition? Palm CEO Ed Colligan seems downright nonchalant about rumors that Apple may introduce a mobile phone to market in the coming year," Sarah Jane Tribble and Dean Takahashi report for The San Jose Mercury News.

Tribble and Takahashi report, "Responding to questions from New York Times correspondent John Markoff at a Churchill Club breakfast gathering Thursday morning, Colligan laughed off the idea that any company -- including the wildly popular Apple Computer -- could easily win customers in the finicky smart-phone sector. 'We've learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone,' he said. 'PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They're not going to just walk in.'"

http://www.macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/palm_ceo_laughs_off_apple_iphone_threat/

[jonessodarally]

"Is Apple serious competition? Palm CEO Ed Colligan seems downright nonchalant about rumors that Apple may introduce a mobile phone to market in the coming year," Sarah Jane Tribble and Dean Takahashi report for The San Jose Mercury News.

Tribble and Takahashi report, "Responding to questions from New York Times correspondent John Markoff at a Churchill Club breakfast gathering Thursday morning, Colligan laughed off the idea that any company -- including the wildly popular Apple Computer -- could easily win customers in the finicky smart-phone sector. 'We've learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone,' he said. 'PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They're not going to just walk in.'"

http://www.macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/palm_ceo_laughs_off_apple_iphone_threat/

This was back in November of '06.
So this was when Palm was getting hyped about the Foleo, eh?



...it's kinda like that "Smarter than a 5th Grader" show.
haha:lol:

[aaarrrgggh]

So... what were # 2 and #3?!

As for reliability problems, I'm on my second, and it shows signs of similar touchpad problems that my first one had. Apple was great about swapping it out though.

It almost got thrown off the roof of a hotel a couple months ago when Safari kept crashing though. Ironically, on Apple's website. An amazingly high number of people I talk to bemoan the lack of integration between contacts and SMS (SMS a contact to someone), SMS and E-Mail, and copy - paste.

Apple really needs to deal with those limitations before the UK Launch, unless they really have the fanatical fanbase comparable to the US.

If nothing else... it looks good... and that is really why people buy mobile phones...

[nagromme]

What's wrong with the reliability, battery life, documentation (LOADS of it) and customer support?

Where did he get that from? I'm curious.

Nothing's wrong. They're "slightly less enamored" about those boring things than about the exciting features--but apparently still enamored :)

If they don't like the iPhone's long talk time, they REALLY don't want to try one of those other smart phones that only gets 2-3 hours battery life! (And yet tend to be thick as a brick, for some unknown reason. Maybe 3G is their problem :) )

[anantksundaram]

Some people have suggested the iPhone is not a "smartphone", .....

I agree. It's not a "smart"phone, it is a geniusphone. Not to get too teary-eyed about it or anything, but no consumer electronics product I have used before compares in form or function.

:)

[anantksundaram]

An amazingly high number of people I talk to bemoan the lack of integration between contacts and SMS (SMS a contact to someone), SMS and E-Mail, and copy - paste.


I wonder why they bought it, then. Those limitations are well-known. Moreover, those are fixes that will come in time.

If folks in the UK want to wait until that happens, then they should! (I predict, though, that it will fly off the shelves in the UK, France, and Germany; we'll know for sure in a few weeks, won't we!).

(One more thing: I don't see why is is so difficult to SMS a contact to someone. In the US, it is very easy to send a text message to anyone via email. The one that I use is number@teleflip.com. Try it out!)

[addabox]

So... what were # 2 and #3?!

As for reliability problems, I'm on my second, and it shows signs of similar touchpad problems that my first one had. Apple was great about swapping it out though.

It almost got thrown off the roof of a hotel a couple months ago when Safari kept crashing though. Ironically, on Apple's website. An amazingly high number of people I talk to bemoan the lack of integration between contacts and SMS (SMS a contact to someone), SMS and E-Mail, and copy - paste.

Apple really needs to deal with those limitations before the UK Launch, unless they really have the fanatical fanbase comparable to the US.

If nothing else... it looks good... and that is really why people buy mobile phones...

You know, at some point, the idea that iPhone sales are propped up by fan boys, or that sales are propped up by the fashion conscious (or that sales are propped up by the delusional, or those succumbing to the the RDF) isn't going to work anymore. As will the idea that sales are soon to take a tumble (if not here than in one of those super demanding European cell phone paradises) because of not have enough "features".

The iPhone is very popular, is selling well, appears to have good prospects, and has very high customer satisfaction ratings.

Maybe, just maybe, there are plenty of people who think the iPhone is a good value for what it does, feel that it does what they want how they want it, and continue to think so after they buy one and tell other people so.

Is that really so hard to believe? That Apple got some things really right, in an industry largely devoted to features buried under terrible UIs? And that there a lot of buyers that appreciated that? And that that is more important than one feature or another?

It doesn't have to always be smoke and mirrors or some kind of misunderstanding or an anomalous blip. Could be Apple made a phone that people want and will buy, in every larger numbers.

[Ireland]

I agree. It's not a "smart"phone, it is a geniusphone.I know it is, but the iPhone nano wont be, that was just my little point.

[artman1033]

Where do they get the numbers? :???: Are they simply counting all the iphones sold? :???: Last week we read the iphone was a top seller for the street vendors in Mumbai.:lol: Are they counting all the iphones sold in NYC that may be heading to Europe?:???: Are they counting all the iphones in Japan?:???:

[Taskiss]

You know, at some point, the idea that iPhone sales are propped up by fan boys, or that sales are propped up by the fashion conscious (or that sales are propped up by the delusional, or those succumbing to the the RDF) isn't going to work anymore.That's what amazes me. A phone breaks onto the scene in a cut-throat market like cellular phone services that requires a carrier lock and more cash than most other phones and rips customers away from their current plans and phones in the numbers that the iPhone is generating and people attribute it to "fanboyism"?

Sheesh. Can you imagine if people WEREN'T locked into existing plans with carriers other than AT&T? I mean, come on! AT&T has a cellular customer base of 63.7 million subscribers out of the more than 233 million cell phone users in the US. iPhone purchases will continue in large numbers for the next couple of years as contract periods expire.

By then the iPhone / AT&T carrier lock contract will expire and Apple will be able to expand onto those other carriers networks... if those other carriers still exist. It'll be interesting.

[studiomusic]

You know, at some point, the idea that iPhone sales are propped up by fan boys, or that sales are propped up by the fashion conscious (or that sales are propped up by the delusional, or those succumbing to the the RDF) isn't going to work anymore. As will the idea that sales are soon to take a tumble (if not here than in one of those super demanding European cell phone paradises) because of not have enough "features".

The iPhone is very popular, is selling well, appears to have good prospects, and has very high customer satisfaction ratings.

Maybe, just maybe, there are plenty of people who think the iPhone is a good value for what it does, feel that it does what they want how they want it, and continue to think so after they buy one and tell other people so.

Is that really so hard to believe? That Apple got some things really right, in an industry largely devoted to features buried under terrible UIs? And that there a lot of buyers that appreciated that? And that that is more important than one feature or another?

It doesn't have to always be smoke and mirrors or some kind of misunderstanding or an anomalous blip. Could be Apple made a phone that people want and will buy, in every larger numbers.


Here, here. Very well put. Thank you.

[aaarrrgggh]

You know, at some point, the idea that iPhone sales are propped up by fan boys, or that sales are propped up by the fashion conscious...

The reality of the cell phone market is that there are two primary segments: functionality and fashion.

The RAZR was a bastard in terms of functionality, but it was a success in fashion. Newer Blackberries become must-haves for PHB and middle managers because they *look* so much better than the old ones. In almost none of these cases is the core functionality the incentive to purchase, or more importantly, upgrade the phone. People buy a new one because it looks better.

Clearly the fact that the RAZR is the best selling phone in history must validate this fact...

The functional market is very different; it is broken into two distinct groups - feature and anti-feature. The feature groups want the built-in microwave oven functionality, and the anti-feature group just want a damn phone that makes calls.

Where Apple has been most successful with the iPhone marketing from what I see is the group whose functional demands are minimal, fashion value high, and help to convert them into higher-end function users. That is simply good marketing. It has nothing to do with 3G, RDF, or anything else. From standing in line though, I know that the bulk of the first two weeks sales were people that would be broadly classified as fanboys. The more politically correct term would be "early adopter..."

[BlackSummerNight]

Fourth? What was one, two, and three.

[Taskiss]

Fourth? What was one, two, and three.
A web site (http://www.1800mobiles.com/) claims:

Best Selling 5 cell phones in America:
Motorola RAZR Phones
Motorola SLVR Cell Phone
Cingular LG CU500
Samsung Blackjack Phone
Blackberry Pearl
Looks like they haven't updated their info yet.

[anantksundaram]

The reality of the cell phone market is that there are two primary segments: functionality and fashion.


With all due respect, that's nonsense.

There's form, and there's function. Apple has always combined the two well. For some, "form" might indeed be "fashion," but that's not the vast majority of people I know. Indeed, I'll venture a guess that it's not the vast majority of iPhone users.

[aegisdesign]

I wonder why they bought it, then. Those limitations are well-known. Moreover, those are fixes that will come in time.

If folks in the UK want to wait until that happens, then they should! (I predict, though, that it will fly off the shelves in the UK, France, and Germany; we'll know for sure in a few weeks, won't we!).

'Folk' [1] buy lots of things without researching what it actually does, especially if it's hyped or the latest new thing from a company with a fashionable brand. I'd disagree that those limitations are well known outside of tech circles. 'Folk' just presume something does all the things their last gadget does and more. How many times have you come across people who presume that Windows comes with Office? or a new copy of OSX comes with iLife ?

For Europe it could come as quite a shock as more of the feature set of other phones are used here when they're not in the USA.

(One more thing: I don't see why is is so difficult to SMS a contact to someone. In the US, it is very easy to send a text message to anyone via email. The one that I use is number@teleflip.com. Try it out!)

But people don't want to use email for sending contacts, they want to use SMS or Bluetooth. People don't use email to send contacts, normally.

But what's wrong with choice anyway? Click on 'Send' on a contact in my phone and I get asked if I want to send it via Bluetooth, Email, SMS, Infrared, Bluetooth shared and even MMS (I presume the picture for the contact is sent too if the vCard format supports it). My phone is almost 4 year old.

Do iPhones even have a 'Send Contact' button ?


[1] Use 'Folk' in the UK and people think you're a country idiot or just stepped off the set of a costume drama. It's an old word we don't use.

[aegisdesign]

Motorola RAZR Phones
Motorola SLVR Cell Phone
Cingular LG CU500
Samsung Blackjack Phone
Blackberry Pearl

None of which are top sellers here in the UK. The only recent stats I found were for Vodafone but all the carriers here sell the same phones for the most part. Vodafone sells Treos too whereas nobody else does now.

Here's Vodafone's top 9 in reverse order as reported by http://mobilementalism.com/2007/10/09/vodafones-top-selling-mobile-phones-for-october/

9). Sony Ericsson K800i
8). Nokia 7373
7). Sony Ericsson W850i
6). Nokia 6110 Navi
5). Sony Ericsson W880i
4).Nokia 6300
3). Nokia N95
2). Samsung U700
1). Samsung G600

It's surprising to see the Samsungs at 1 and 2 but they've been heavily advertised on TV here recently.

[dfiler]

The reality of the cell phone market is that there are two primary segments: functionality and fashion.

The RAZR was a bastard in terms of functionality, but it was a success in fashion. Newer Blackberries become must-haves for PHB and middle managers because they *look* so much better than the old ones. In almost none of these cases is the core functionality the incentive to purchase, or more importantly, upgrade the phone. People buy a new one because it looks better.

Clearly the fact that the RAZR is the best selling phone in history must validate this fact...

The functional market is very different; it is broken into two distinct groups - feature and anti-feature. The feature groups want the built-in microwave oven functionality, and the anti-feature group just want a damn phone that makes calls.

Where Apple has been most successful with the iPhone marketing from what I see is the group whose functional demands are minimal, fashion value high, and help to convert them into higher-end function users. That is simply good marketing. It has nothing to do with 3G, RDF, or anything else. From standing in line though, I know that the bulk of the first two weeks sales were people that would be broadly classified as fanboys. The more politically correct term would be "early adopter..."I like the functional/fashion distinction as it is an interesting topic of conversation.

However, I would characterize the razor in the exact opposite manner you have. Sure, it is nice looking, but I think it is one of the most functional phones ever made. It has nice large buttons, good speaker placement, good size, etc.

I see the feature-loaded phones as being more fashion motivated then most of the basic/simple phones. They're bought because they look good (on paper) and can be paraded around in front of other techno-dweebs.

If you look at what people do on their phones, they mostly make phone calls and text each other. Everything else gets forgotten after the first week. Although, now that apple has made a lot of features hassle free, I see that balance changing. People will continue to use extended functionality long after the novelty wears off.

Hence, feature rich phones will soon be considered "functional" rather than "fashionable". The whole fashionable/functional association with features is being reversed.

[caliminius]

You know, at some point, the idea that iPhone sales are propped up by fan boys, or that sales are propped up by the fashion conscious (or that sales are propped up by the delusional, or those succumbing to the the RDF) isn't going to work anymore. As will the idea that sales are soon to take a tumble (if not here than in one of those super demanding European cell phone paradises) because of not have enough "features".

The iPhone is very popular, is selling well, appears to have good prospects, and has very high customer satisfaction ratings.

Maybe, just maybe, there are plenty of people who think the iPhone is a good value for what it does, feel that it does what they want how they want it, and continue to think so after they buy one and tell other people so.

Is that really so hard to believe? That Apple got some things really right, in an industry largely devoted to features buried under terrible UIs? And that there a lot of buyers that appreciated that? And that that is more important than one feature or another?

It doesn't have to always be smoke and mirrors or some kind of misunderstanding or an anomalous blip. Could be Apple made a phone that people want and will buy, in every larger numbers.

Actually, I think it has to be out more than the 5 months it has to actually say that it is not just fanboyism or fashion conscious people. I'm pretty sure that is was mostly the fashion conscious that pushed the RAZR to it's still #1 spot. If it's still #4 (or higher) this time next year than you have a point. Right now, I'd still say the iPhone could easily be part of the early-adopter frenzy (which could last for a while as people wait for their current contracts to end before picking up the iPhone). As the article states, even the top 10 cell phones constitute only 25% of the cell phone market. That sort of seems to indicate that iPhone sales don't have to be huge for it to make the top 10.

[mdriftmeyer]

Downsizing the iPhone would ruin it.

[BlackSummerNight]

I just got a samsung blackjack, the reason it's on the list is because it's 3G and dirt cheap now.
A web site (http://www.1800mobiles.com/) claims:


Looks like they haven't updated their info yet.

[addabox]

The reality of the cell phone market is that there are two primary segments: functionality and fashion.

The RAZR was a bastard in terms of functionality, but it was a success in fashion. Newer Blackberries become must-haves for PHB and middle managers because they *look* so much better than the old ones. In almost none of these cases is the core functionality the incentive to purchase, or more importantly, upgrade the phone. People buy a new one because it looks better.

Clearly the fact that the RAZR is the best selling phone in history must validate this fact...

The functional market is very different; it is broken into two distinct groups - feature and anti-feature. The feature groups want the built-in microwave oven functionality, and the anti-feature group just want a damn phone that makes calls.

Where Apple has been most successful with the iPhone marketing from what I see is the group whose functional demands are minimal, fashion value high, and help to convert them into higher-end function users. That is simply good marketing. It has nothing to do with 3G, RDF, or anything else. From standing in line though, I know that the bulk of the first two weeks sales were people that would be broadly classified as fanboys. The more politically correct term would be "early adopter..."

I think the form/function thing is a real red herring, when it comes to software/hardware devices like the iPhone.

To a large extent, the iPhone is the interface. Yes, it's thin and nicely made and all, but when you look at it, your looking at the UI. In that sense, its form is it's function.

So when we talk about the iPhone being "elegant", we mean it in a different sense from, say, a pair of shoes or a bit of jewelry, which are entirely defined by their look and which is what is implied by your use of the word "fashion".

The iPhone's look derives from what it does-- large, scratch resistant surface, made as thinly as possible, with an interface designed around touch and multi-touch, with a particular emphasis on exposing functionality and cross linking same.

The interesting thing about asserting that the iPhone is being bought by people whose "functional demands are limited" (and who must therefore be buying for "fashion") is, I think, that it gets it exactly backwards.

The reason that there is such a category as "I just want a damn phone" is because many, if not most, people are aware that "features", on a cell phone, generally mean added complexity and cost without providing much benefit, because most people can't figure out how to use them.

This is a point that keeps getting dropped: most phone UIs are horrible. Yes, I know, various camps have their adherents, who swear that they have a phone that works just fine for them, but the fact is is that most people who got talked into buying phones with internet or email or media features couldn't use them if you put a gun to their head.

"I just want a damn phone" isn't some kind of inevitable stance, anymore than "I just want an email box" is an inevitable default position for any large percentage of computer users. The difference is that most people can sort out how to do a bit more than email on their computer, because the functionality is typically exposed at the top or nearly top level, whereas most phones militantly mitigate against venturing very far away from pressing the "call" button by burying functionality behind tiny buttons and nested menus. If you don't know anyone who is literally afraid to start delving into the possibilities of their phone, for fear that they will "break it", then you travel in fairly narrow circles.

At this point the conversation usually starts to recapitulate the old Windows/Mac debate, System 7 vs. Win 95 days: Macs are only easy to use because they are toys, real work requires complexity, anyone "smart" or "serious" should be able to learn how to use their tools and there is something faintly shameful in "easy".

What the iPhone does, in fact, is put things like email and the web and media playback into the hands of the "I just want a damn phone" crowd, which, for that segment, is a huge upgrade in functionality. So in that sense I think that comparing the iPhone to say, the Blackberry, and saying that it for the "less demanding" sort of misses the mark. It does ninety percent of what the Blackberry does, but in a way that people who would never dream of mastering such a "business" phone can actually relate to.

Which is, for lack of a better word, elegant.

[dr_lha]

[1] Use 'Folk' in the UK and people think you're a country idiot or just stepped off the set of a costume drama. It's an old word we don't use.
"We" do use it in the UK, maybe you don't, but people around my way do. I expect its a regional thing, and your ranting about it rather deflects from the cutting point of your main rant (i.e. iPhone's lack of standard features).

Personally I think the lack of MMS is going to hit much harder in the UK than it did in the USA for example.

[Walter Slocombe]

Downsizing the iPhone would ruin it.

Agreed!

[anantksundaram]

'Folk' [1] .......

[1] Use 'Folk' in the UK and people think you're a country idiot or just stepped off the set of a costume drama. It's an old word we don't use.

:lol::lol:

I grew up speaking British English, and now, after 25 years in the US, I speak/write schizophrenic English..... you know, I vacillate (like the the to.may.to/to.mah.to thing....)

[anantksundaram]

"We" do use it in the UK, maybe you don't, but people around my way do. I expect its a regional thing, and your ranting about it rather deflects from the cutting point of your main rant (i.e. iPhone's lack of standard features).

I always thought that it was one of those 'maths' v. 'math' or 'periods' v. 'period' (that's a gender-specific reference) kind of thing.

We'll never get it resolved.......

[extremeskater]

You know, at some point, the idea that iPhone sales are propped up by fan boys, or that sales are propped up by the fashion conscious (or that sales are propped up by the delusional, or those succumbing to the the RDF) isn't going to work anymore. As will the idea that sales are soon to take a tumble (if not here than in one of those super demanding European cell phone paradises) because of not have enough "features".

The iPhone is very popular, is selling well, appears to have good prospects, and has very high customer satisfaction ratings.

Maybe, just maybe, there are plenty of people who think the iPhone is a good value for what it does, feel that it does what they want how they want it, and continue to think so after they buy one and tell other people so.

Is that really so hard to believe? That Apple got some things really right, in an industry largely devoted to features buried under terrible UIs? And that there a lot of buyers that appreciated that? And that that is more important than one feature or another?

It doesn't have to always be smoke and mirrors or some kind of misunderstanding or an anomalous blip. Could be Apple made a phone that people want and will buy, in every larger numbers.


The problem is the data is always slanted. The word "potentially" is used alot on articles like this, instead of tracking an entire year they always track a good quarter.

They use a phone like the Razr that has been out forever saying sales have slowed, of course they have slowed it was the best selling phone for a long time, you can only go down from there. Its stupid.

The iPhone is a nice product, it appears to be well made, no arguement there, the issue is its still expensive compared to what most are willing to pay for a cell phone, even a smart phone in the US, not to mention the voice/data plan that needs to be purchased to take full advantage of the phone.

It's a great phone for what it does, the problem is most do not need what it does. For those that do its a good option but I never see it taking over the market. Not many families are going to buy 3-4 iPhones and spend the upfront cost not to mention the monthly cost of owning one.

Cost of ownership at least right now is still too high for the aveerage cell phone user/family.

For someone that wants one they know they want one and they want nothing else, for someone that walk into an ATT story they will be talked into something else based on price/performace.

[anantksundaram]

I think the form/function thing is a real red herring, when it comes to software/hardware devices like the iPhone.

To a large extent, the iPhone is the interface. Yes, it's thin and nicely made and all, but when you look at it, your looking at the UI. In that sense, its form is it's function.

So when we talk about the iPhone being "elegant", we mean it in a different sense from, say, a pair of shoes or a bit of jewelry, which are entirely defined by their look and which is what is implied by your use of the word "fashion".

The iPhone's look derives from what it does-- large, scratch resistant surface, made as thinly as possible, with an interface designed around touch and multi-touch, with a particular emphasis on exposing functionality and cross linking same.

The interesting thing about asserting that the iPhone is being bought by people whose "functional demands are limited" (and who must therefore be buying for "fashion") is, I think, that it gets it exactly backwards.

The reason that there is such a category as "I just want a damn phone" is because many, if not most, people are aware that "features", on a cell phone, generally mean added complexity and cost without providing much benefit, because most people can't figure out how to use them.

This is a point that keeps getting dropped: most phone UIs are horrible. Yes, I know, various camps have their adherents, who swear that they have a phone that works just fine for them, but the fact is is that most people who got talked into buying phones with internet or email or media features couldn't use them if you put a gun to their head.

"I just want a damn phone" isn't some kind of inevitable stance, anymore than "I just want an email box" is an inevitable default position for any large percentage of computer users. The difference is that most people can sort out how to do a bit more than email on their computer, because the functionality is typically exposed at the top or nearly top level, whereas most phones militantly mitigate against venturing very far away from pressing the "call" button by burying functionality behind tiny buttons and nested menus. If you don't know anyone who is literally afraid to start delving into the possibilities of their phone, for fear that they will "break it", then you travel in fairly narrow circles.

At this point the conversation usually starts to recapitulate the old Windows/Mac debate, System 7 vs. Win 95 days: Macs are only easy to use because they are toys, real work requires complexity, anyone "smart" or "serious" should be able to learn how to use their tools and there is something faintly shameful in "easy".

What the iPhone does, in fact, is put things like email and the web and media playback into the hands of the "I just want a damn phone" crowd, which, for that segment, is a huge upgrade in functionality. So in that sense I think that comparing the iPhone to say, the Blackberry, and saying that it for the "less demanding" sort of misses the mark. It does ninety percent of what the Blackberry does, but in a way that people who would never dream of mastering such a "business" phone can actually relate to.

Which is, for lack of a better word, elegant.

Brilliant.

(I re-posted your entire post on purpose).


(Wow -- I suppose this is an obligatory rite of passage -- but this is my millennial post! Woo-Hoo!!!! Sorry......)

[JeffDM]

I thought there would be a lot more models that would have greater than 1 to 2% market share. I guess that means that the multitude of devices have a lot lower sales volumes. Maybe it should not be a surprise because there are a ridiculous number of models from just about everyone.

[addabox]

The problem is the data is always slanted. The word "potentially" is used alot on articles like this, instead of tracking an entire year they always track a good quarter.

They use a phone like the Razr that has been out forever saying sales have slowed, of course they have slowed it was the best selling phone for a long time, you can only go down from there. Its stupid.

The iPhone is a nice product, it appears to be well made, no arguement there, the issue is its still expensive compared to what most are willing to pay for a cell phone, even a smart phone in the US, not to mention the voice/data plan that needs to be purchased to take full advantage of the phone.

It's a great phone for what it does, the problem is most do not need what it does. For those that do its a good option but I never see it taking over the market. Not many families are going to buy 3-4 iPhones and spend the upfront cost not to mention the monthly cost of owning one.

Cost of ownership at least right now is still too high for the aveerage cell phone user/family.

For someone that wants one they know they want one and they want nothing else, for someone that walk into an ATT story they will be talked into something else based on price/performace.


But many of those same families have multiple computers, that cost more than the iPhone.

That's an expense they're willing to bear, because the versatility of the computer is well understood by the average family.

As it stands, "the average family" does not grasp the utility of having internet/email/media device on your person at all times, because the phones that offer those things have terrible UIs and make using those functions difficult to use, for the average person. Moreover, this kind of functionality is not yet ubiquitous enough to seem "normal" and the kind of thing an average person would want.

My contention is that the iPhone changes this, that it represents an inevitable trend in "cell phones", and that it won't be very long before having a cell phone that "just makes calls" will seem as willfully limited as having one of those "email stations" (if they even make those, anymore) that supposedly spared you the horror of booting up a computer to have email.

Everyone is (are already) going to make a strong push for this space, but I believe that Apple has gotten there first. When they designed the iPhone, I don't think they looked at other "smart phones" and tried to figure out how to compete with them. I think they thought about what "average families" might find useful to do with an always on portable device, if that functionality were genuinely easy to use. Their advertising makes this explicit-- examples and testimonials of how such a device is useful in the day to day life of "average people". Any other cell phone makers do this? Every wonder why not?

Nobody wants to spend much money on tech that doesn't seem to offer them real benefits or that does things they don't "need". But once those benefits become clear (and the culture begins to support the idea that such benefits are desirable, as in the case of internet access or having a cell phone at all), then the cost equation changes.

[melgross]

Someone please, please post that quote from the (Palm?) CEO deriding Apple's ability to just come in and change the smartphone industry overnight.

You have to expect that. He has to try to prevent users from leaving the platform, and investors from selling the stock.

It's part of his job to shore up the public image of the company.

As long as he doesn't lie about sales figures, profits, etc., it's fine.

[melgross]

With all due respect, that's nonsense.

There's form, and there's function. Apple has always combined the two well. For some, "form" might indeed be "fashion," but that's not the vast majority of people I know. Indeed, I'll venture a guess that it's not the vast majority of iPhone users.

It depends on the phone, and why it's being bought.

When I bought my old Samsung i300 color Palmphone, I bought it because of what it was, the fact that it looked pretty cool, was nice, but secondary to what it was.

The same thing is true for my Treo 700p. I didn't buy it for looks, though I think it looks fine for what it does.

But, it would be true that a greater percentage of people buyinh the iPhone are more devided on those issues.

I do think that there is the "cool" buying crowd, and that there is the It's a Mac mobile phone, iPod" buying crowd. And the "This does some amazing things that I could really need), buying crowd.

[extremeskater]

But many of those same families have multiple computers, that cost more than the iPhone.

That's an expense they're willing to bear, because the versatility of the computer is well understood by the average family.

As it stands, "the average family" does not grasp the utility of having internet/email/media device on your person at all times, because the phones that offer those things have terrible UIs and make using those functions difficult to use, for the average person. Moreover, this kind of functionality is not yet ubiquitous enough to seem "normal" and the kind of thing an average person would want.

My contention is that the iPhone changes this, that it represents an inevitable trend in "cell phones", and that it won't be very long before having a cell phone that "just makes calls" will seem as willfully limited as having one of those "email stations" (if they even make those, anymore) that supposedly spared you the horror of booting up a computer to have email.

Everyone is (are already) going to make a strong push for this space, but I believe that Apple has gotten there first. When they designed the iPhone, I don't think they looked at other "smart phones" and tried to figure out how to compete with them. I think they thought about what "average families" might find useful to do with an always on portable device, if that functionality were genuinely easy to use. Their advertising makes this explicit-- examples and testimonials of how such a device is useful in the day to day life of "average people". Any other cell phone makers do this? Every wonder why not?

Nobody wants to spend much money on tech that doesn't seem to offer them real benefits or that does things they don't "need". But once those benefits become clear (and the culture begins to support the idea that such benefits are desirable, as in the case of internet access or having a cell phone at all), then the cost equation changes.

I don't disagree with your point of view on this, I agree that the iPhone has a great UI, and for people who know they want an iPhone it's the only option for them.

It just my opinion that right now the total cost of ownership is it's limiting factor. Some will say its the lack of third party apps, or iTouch issues , while some of those may be issues, the overall cost at least right now will keep it from dominating the market.

At least in the US, not sure about other countries, it has been a long time standard that signing a contract will bring you a cheap or free phone. Right now that is a long time seed that has been planted.

Even at 399.00 by the time you are done with tax, accessories you are talking 500+ people just can't wrap their brain around that when they have to lock into a contract.

Will the iPhone do well, I think it will, I do believe it has a harder road to dominate.

Like with everything else technology comes down in price, wireless plans seem to be slow with pricing but hopefully that will change also.

[Project2501]

But people don't want to use email for sending contacts, they want to use SMS or Bluetooth. People don't use email to send contacts, normally.

But what's wrong with choice anyway? Click on 'Send' on a contact in my phone and I get asked if I want to send it via Bluetooth, Email, SMS, Infrared, Bluetooth shared and even MMS (I presume the picture for the contact is sent too if the vCard format supports it). My phone is almost 4 year old.

Do iPhones even have a 'Send Contact' button ?
That's the problem with US based phone company, US mobile phone networks are so deprived, that they don't even see half of the potential mobile phone features.

[aegisdesign]

"We" do use it in the UK, maybe you don't, but people around my way do. I expect its a regional thing, and your ranting about it rather deflects from the cutting point of your main rant (i.e. iPhone's lack of standard features)..

Hardly a rant - I even footnoted it. I've not heard it outside of more rural southern England, and usually only older locals.

That's the problem with US based phone company, US mobile phone networks are so deprived, that they don't even see half of the potential mobile phone features.

It'll be interesting to see where the iPhone UI goes. If they are going to add more features for Europe that we're accustomed to here, the interface will have to get more complex. It's simplicity and elegance just now is because it's missing features and to some extent they've over simplified it. eg. no cut and paste.

Of course they may just decide to permanently not implement some features to keep the iPhone simple and elegant, but then many people will just see that as limiting and buy something else.

[melgross]

It'll be interesting to see where the iPhone UI goes. If they are going to add more features for Europe that we're accustomed to here, the interface will have to get more complex. It's simplicity and elegance just now is because it's missing features and to some extent they've over simplified it. eg. no cut and paste.

Of course they may just decide to permanently not implement some features to keep the iPhone simple and elegant, but then many people will just see that as limiting and buy something else.

I'm not sure where you're going with this. Apple has stated that they are only expecting 10% of the smartphone market. That means that they don't have to be something to everyone.

I do think that a much larger percentage of that market will be interested once this SDK comes into being, along with 3G. But, even then, we really DON"T want Apple to attempt an appeal to everyone. That will just water it down. Despite what you say, there is more than enough market for this phone for the Nokia big shot to have proclaimed, the other day, that he was "paranoid" about it. That's a much stronger statement for one in his position than I would ever have expected, and must have been a slip. But, it does indicate that he feels that more people than you think, may be interested in this.

If Apple followed your policy with OS X for computers, we would be running Apple's version of Windows, instead of the one we have now, because it would follow your philosophy of Apple copying what most people are using, and THINK they need, when perhaps, they don't.

[anantksundaram]

If Apple followed your policy with OS X for computers, we would be running Apple's version of Windows

'Nuff said.

8-)

[bavlondon2]

Currently, the top selling handset in the U.S. continues to be Motorola’s RAZR V3, however it appears to be losing momentum as new and more competitive models that erode both its share and popularity are being introduced

I think that says it all. Do you really expect anything difference when such an outdated and ancient phone is the best selling phone currently? Its only the best selling phone because in the states you dont get half as many god phones as you get in Europe.

Heck I think you only just got the N95 recently? Where as in Europe we now have the 8gb version.

[melgross]

I think that says it all. Do you really expect anything difference when such an outdated and ancient phone is the best selling phone currently? Its only the best selling phone because in the states you dont get half as many god phones as you get in Europe.

Heck I think you only just got the N95 recently? Where as in Europe we now have the 8gb version.

It's really because most people here don't care much about their phone. Because of that, newer phones MAY take longer to arrive, esp. the higher end models, if they are other than Blackberry, Win Mobile, Palm, and now the iPhone. The distribution of manufacturers are different here than they are in Europe.

The N95 hasn't received many good reviews here, for example. It often seems that the phones most liked in Europe are most disliked here, and visa versa.

I'm very interested in what happens to the iPhone sales across the areas in Europe where it will be sold.

Several members of AI are staking their reputations as experts in the phone field with their predictions that the iPhone will do poorly because of what they delight in assuming are inferior performance and features.

With the January announcement of Apple's sales figures, we will see if that's true or not. I don't think that Europe's phone users are any more sophisticated than the users here. They certainly don't seem to be willing to pay for all of these services the companies offer. Availability does not prove usage.

If the iPhone sells well, and it doesn't have to be a mob arousing situation to do so, then that may show that some of the features of other phones are not as important as has been thought by a few here.

[bavlondon2]

It's really because most people here don't care much about their phone. Because of that, newer phones MAY take longer to arrive, esp. the higher end models, if they are other than Blackberry, Win Mobile, Palm, and now the iPhone. The distribution of manufacturers are different here than they are in Europe.

The N95 hasn't received many good reviews here, for example. It often seems that the phones most liked in Europe are most disliked here, and visa versa.

I'm very interested in what happens to the iPhone sales across the areas in Europe where it will be sold.

Several members of AI are staking their reputations as experts in the phone field with their predictions that the iPhone will do poorly because of what they delight in assuming are inferior performance and features.

With the January announcement of Apple's sales figures, we will see if that's true or not. I don't think that Europe's phone users are any more sophisticated than the users here. They certainly don't seem to be willing to pay for all of these services the companies offer. Availability does not prove usage.

If the iPhone sells well, and it doesn't have to be a mob arousing situation to do so, then that may show that some of the features of other phones are not as important as has been thought by a few here.

In Europe the market is very saturated. People know what they want. In terms of phones they want 5MP, WIFI, 3G/HSDPA and good media capabilties. In terms of pricing they want lots of minutes, textx and now more want data allowances. The iphone tarrif for theUK is ok but could be better. Infact thats being too generous. For £35 i get 600 xnet minutes, 400 textx and unlimited data anytime.

For 35 on the iphonr tarrif you only get not even half the number minutes and texts so it remains to be seen how well it does.

[anantksundaram]

Heck I think you only just got the N95 recently? Where as in Europe we now have the 8gb version.

So, do you own one? Or know anyone that owns one?

Also, I've asked this before of people who think all this supposedly great stuff that is available in Europe is so cool: Can you point to any sales or market share or adoption data to let us know if consumers actually buy this stuff? Or is it just ad-ware? For instance, I can point to hard data that says that over a million iPhones were sold in the US in the first 90 days. Also, I speculate that Apple could sell upwards of 2.5 million phones before the end of the 2007 calendar year.

[anantksundaram]

In Europe the market is very saturated. People know what they want. In terms of phones they want 5MP, WIFI, 3G/HSDPA and good media capabilties.

I am willing to believe you, but can we have some data, please?

Otherwise I am afraid you are just blowing smoke: You think they "know" and you think "they want......."

:rolleyes:

[aegisdesign]

I'm not sure where you're going with this. Apple has stated that they are only expecting 10% of the smartphone market. That means that they don't have to be something to everyone.

My point about things we expect in Europe was more about standard features every phone has so it really is about being something to everyone. Everyone expects 3G, MMS, a decent camera, video and bluetooth transfer in a high end phone here. I can't see how they can't add that as well as the interface changes needed to support those features.

I generally love Apple's 'less is more' approach but only to an extent.

If Apple followed your policy with OS X for computers, we would be running Apple's version of Windows, instead of the one we have now, because it would follow your philosophy of Apple copying what most people are using, and THINK they need, when perhaps, they don't.

You misunderstood. I'm looking at Apple to make the features people actually use more accessible like they've done with voicemail.

IMHO they didn't go far enough in the iPhone as you've still got separate apps for sms, email and voicemail when they should just have one messaging interface. Add MMS in to that and file transfers. Oddly, that's what my ancient SE p910i does already - all messages of all types are in one app, except for voicemail. Visual Voicemail was genius.



Also, I've asked this before of people who think all this supposedly great stuff that is available in Europe is so cool: Can you point to any sales or market share or adoption data to let us know if consumers actually buy this stuff? Or is it just ad-ware? For instance, I can point to hard data that says that over a million iPhones were sold in the US in the first 90 days. Also, I speculate that Apple could sell upwards of 2.5 million phones before the end of the 2007 calendar year.

I cobbled together a figure of 3.85 million N95 sales since March in this thread from Nokia's financial results...

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showpost.php?p=1162338&postcount=41

Of course it's just one of at least a dozen phones available that you could compare to the iPhone as a smartphone or media phone. Maybe more but I tend to lump the HTC rebadges in as one horrible turd mass.

You can get W850 Walkman phones for about £50 here now without a contract on PAYG. They're about 18 months old in the market and I'd guess due to be made obsolete by a new model. I know three twelve year olds that are getting them for Christmas or better even. 2mp camera, video, bluetooth and up to 4GB of ram - perfect for kids. The iPhone specs are worse than that and my 12 year old hated trying to type on the iPod Touch and switches off the T9 in her current phone as it stops her using TXT speak (sigh). She also thought it was too big.

[TenoBell]

IMHO they didn't go far enough in the iPhone as you've still got separate apps for sms, email and voicemail when they should just have one messaging interface. Add MMS in to that and file transfers. Oddly, that's what my ancient SE p910i does already - all messages of all types are in one app, except for voicemail. Visual Voicemail was genius.

This is consistent with what Apple does. Windows lumps many functions into one app.

Windows Media Player plays audio, video, and DVD all in one app. While Apple has Quicktime, iTunes, and a separate DVD Player app.

[JeffDM]

This is consistent with what Apple does. Windows lumps many functions into one app.

Windows Media Player plays audio, video, and DVD all in one app. While Apple has Quicktime, iTunes, and a separate DVD Player app.

Is there really a net positive benefit to one approach over the other?

I think maybe Apple has to split the functionality a bit, because I don't think they can include DVD playback with iTunes for Windows without paying a license fee.

It would be nice if all three unified on more things, such as the keystroke needed to play full screen.

[TenoBell]

Is there really a net positive benefit to one approach over the other?

I'm sure there a pros and cons to both ways. I was pointing out that Apple generally splits functions into different apps.

I'm sure placing too many functions into one app makes it challenging to add to one function without detracting from another.

Quicktime, iTunes, and DVD Player are all media players, but their development paths, purposes, and user functionality have all gone in different directions from one another.

[aegisdesign]

This is consistent with what Apple does. Windows lumps many functions into one app.

Ahem...

Apple lumps in RSS, Email, ToDo, Notes and Appointments in Mail in Leopard. A step which I think is retrogressive. But I get your point. That WAS true of Apple.

My point is that messaging is really one function regardless of the transport used so they could have used one Inbox, not many.

Windows Media Player plays audio, video, and DVD all in one app. While Apple has Quicktime, iTunes, and a separate DVD Player app.

Three apps where one would do. We've got three quite different interfaces to play media. Four if you count Front Row.

'Consistent' is not a word that Apple are familiar with these days.

[melgross]

My point about things we expect in Europe was more about standard features every phone has so it really is about being something to everyone. Everyone expects 3G, MMS, a decent camera, video and bluetooth transfer in a high end phone here. I can't see how they can't add that as well as the interface changes needed to support those features.

You're saying then, that every cell user in Europe has a 3G phone, video and Bluetooth, as well as all of these other features. That's pretty hard to believe.


IMHO they didn't go far enough in the iPhone as you've still got separate apps for sms, email and voicemail when they should just have one messaging interface. Add MMS in to that and file transfers. Oddly, that's what my ancient SE p910i does already - all messages of all types are in one app, except for voicemail. Visual Voicemail was genius.

If you've read all the negative comments here about Apple putting several communication features in the new Mail app, you'll see why what they do in Europe isn't universally admired. Many people don't want all of this in one app. It's a matter of philosophy. It's neither better nor worse.

[TenoBell]

Apple lumps in RSS, Email, ToDo, Notes and Appointments in Mail in Leopard.

Do all of these functions need their own apps?

Three apps where one would do. We've got three quite different interfaces to play media. Four if you count Front Row.

They all play media but over all they perform different functions.

Quicktime itself is the basis for Apple's media playback and content creation. Its best if that carries as little extra baggage as necessary. Quicktime requires a simple interface for media playback.

iTunes primary job is the acquisition, organization, and storage of large quantities of media files. Also to sync media and information to the iPod and iPhone. iTunes requires an interface suitable for managing large numbers of audio and video files. iTunes could playback DVD, but the way it is currently designed is not the best interface for navigating DVD menus.

Which is why there is a dedicated DVD player. It avoids other apps carrying around the luggage of DVD playback software. The players interface can be dedicated to the DVD style of menus and controls, without having to compromise with the interface of another app that has an entirely different purpose.

Front Row isn't so much an entirely different app but more a front end interface to easily use all of OS X media apps on your television. You have the option to use it or not.

[aegisdesign]

You're saying then, that every cell user in Europe has a 3G phone, video and Bluetooth, as well as all of these other features. That's pretty hard to believe.

Apart from 3G, yes, at least in the UK. I don't know anyone without them. Even the crappy phone you get on supermarket checkouts that you pick up as an afterthought for £30 without a contract have them.

But we're talking about new high end phones like the iPhone not £30 supermarket phones.



If you've read all the negative comments here about Apple putting several communication features in the new Mail app, you'll see why what they do in Europe isn't universally admired. Many people don't want all of this in one app. It's a matter of philosophy. It's neither better nor worse.

I wouldn't say it's a particularly European trait. Looks straight out of Redmond IMHO. I'm firmly in the worse camp although I'm sure I'll use the todo feature - pity they don't sync to the iPhone.


Do all of these functions need their own apps?

They all play media but over all they perform different functions.

Quicktime itself is the basis for Apple's media playback and content creation. Its best if that carries as little extra baggage as necessary. Quicktime requires a simple interface for media playback.

iTunes primary job is the acquisition, organization, and storage of large quantities of media files. Also to sync media and information to the iPod and iPhone. iTunes requires an interface suitable for managing large numbers of audio and video files. iTunes could playback DVD, but the way it is currently designed is not the best interface for navigating DVD menus.

Which is why there is a dedicated DVD player. It avoids other apps carrying around the luggage of DVD playback software. The players interface can be dedicated to the DVD style of menus and controls, without having to compromise with the interface of another app that has an entirely different purpose.

Front Row isn't so much an entirely different app but more a front end interface to easily use all of OS X media apps on your television. You have the option to use it or not.

Sure, you can explain all that if you're a geek but it's coming from a technical background, not a functional one. There's no functional difference as far as a user is concerned with playing a movie from a DVD or from a hard disk - they're just watching a movie - why should the interface be different?

Equally from my technical background, I can't see why Quicktime Player couldn't also be the DVD player - the interfaces are minimally different and you could easily have interface 'modes' depending on context. I don't see why iTunes doesn't open video in a Quicktime Player window, giving you better control than the pitiful controls you have in iTunes. And I don't see why iTunes is used to sync iPods (and now iPhones but not other people's phones) instead of iSync.

Oh and now we've QuickLook. SIX interfaces to media files.

Oh and also the media inspector in iLife/iWork Cocoa apps, but not iTunes. SEVEN.

It's not about baggage - I think there would actually be less if Apple rewrote iTunes and updated Quicktime to use the newer technology they're using in the rest of the OS. Roll on iTunes8 and Quicktime8.

To me it just smacks of departments within Apple all protecting their pie instead of someone sitting back and working out a consistent media interface.

Anyway, going off topic, I was just hoping with a 1.0 product like the iPhone they'd have the opportunity to rethink a bit harder than they already did. Maybe merging mail and SMS would be just too weird for some people although they did make SMS more like iChat, which may yet confuse people when iChat on the iPhone actually appears.

[TenoBell]

There's no functional difference as far as a user is concerned with playing a movie from a DVD or from a hard disk - they're just watching a movie - why should the interface be different?

Because there is a specific menu and control system for DVD that is different from watching Quicktime movies or streaming video from the web.

As is shown here, DVD Player 5.0 ( http://youtube.com/watch?v=5hwcey6Vp9I)

Adding DVD Player into Quicktime adds software that would mostly go unused but has to be carried around as QT is used in iLife, iWork, Photoshop, After Effects, Premiere, FCP, Logic, ProTools, Avid. And any other QT media based software.

Oh and now we've QuickLook. SIX interfaces to media files.

Quicklook isn't a new interface, its simply a Quicktime viewer without opening the app.

Oh and also the media inspector in iLife/iWork Cocoa apps, but not iTunes. SEVEN.

iLife and iWork are content creation apps that use QT as its media framework. iTunes is for media playback and storage. iTunes is not intended to be used to create or edit content so there is no need for a media inspector.

To me it just smacks of departments within Apple all protecting their pie instead of someone sitting back and working out a consistent media interface.

I agree with Mel this a Apple's philosophy. Build different apps that do what they do well. It has its advantages and disadvantages.

[aegisdesign]

Because there is a specific menu and control system for DVD that is different from watching Quicktime movies or streaming video from the web.

As is shown here, DVD Player 5.0 ( http://youtube.com/watch?v=5hwcey6Vp9I)

Other than chapters, I don't see the difference at all. Forward, pause, play, back, stop - all the same functionality needed for a movie be it on a disc or a hard disc or the net. ie. all the buttons on an Apple remote.


Adding DVD Player into Quicktime adds software that would mostly go unused but has to be carried around as QT is used in iLife, iWork, Photoshop, After Effects, Premiere, FCP, Logic, ProTools, Avid. And any other QT media based software.

That isn't true. The player and the framework are separate. DVD Player sits on top of DVD Playback Services and then on top of Quicktime just as Quicktime Player sits on Quicktime does or iTunes does. iWork and iLife use Cocoa's QTKit, not the player. Adobe I've no idea.



Quicklook isn't a new interface, its simply a Quicktime viewer without opening the app.


It's not the same interface as Quicktime Player, even if it's using the Quicktime framework.


iLife and iWork are content creation apps that use QT as its media framework. iTunes is for media playback and storage. iTunes is not intended to be used to create or edit content so there is no need for a media inspector.


Except for ringtones. :D



I agree with Mel this a Apple's philosophy. Build different apps that do what they do well. It has its advantages and disadvantages.

Except for Leopard's Mail.app, Safari, iTunes...

7 media viewers, 3 points for sync, 2 RSS readers, 2 todo list editors, 3? notes tools...

I really don't think Apple has a philosophy any more. Like they don't follow HIG anymore either. Lately they've been cramming more and more features into apps, often duplicating features that are done elsewhere. I don't think that's always a bad thing - breaking with dogma - but it can seem somewhat chaotic.

[TenoBell]

Other than chapters, I don't see the difference at all. Forward, pause, play, back, stop - all the same functionality needed for a movie be it on a disc or a hard disc or the net. ie. all the buttons on an Apple remote.

Every media player has: Play, FF, RW, Stop. That doesn't mean they all perform the same function.

DVD also has chapters. Which requires an interface for easily displaying what chapter is currently being watched, how many chapter there are, and navigating those chapters. In DVD Player 5 Apple includes a drop down linear time bar across the top of the screen to allow visual navigation of the chapters.

But whatever, this going nowhere and we are just being argumentative. Plus Apple has a separate DVD Player and that's the way it is.

[JeffDM]

Every media player has: Play, FF, RW, Stop. That doesn't mean they all perform the same function.

DVD also has chapters. Which requires an interface for easily displaying what chapter is currently being watched, how many chapter there are, and navigating those chapters. In DVD Player 5 Apple includes a drop down linear time bar across the top of the screen to allow visual navigation of the chapters.

Don't the iTunes video downloads offer chapters? I suppose they don't, I don't remember any on the few videos I've bought. I really don't think it makes sense to not have them, so the linear bar shouldn't need to be the special province of just one media type.

The thing that I don't get is that the stuff that's currently only commonly being done on DVD can be done with video files, but are not. Chapter marks, closed captions, subtitle tracks, multiple audio tracks are not some mystical concepts that can't or shouldn't be done in video files. I think it's pretty disappointing that this isn't more common.

But whatever, this going nowhere and we are just being argumentative. Plus Apple has a separate DVD Player and that's the way it is.

I don't think anyone was contesting that fact. But that doesn't mean that the Apple way is ideal, and that's what we were discussing here. I still think the reasons for separation are more because of a certain kind of pragmatism and history, and not out of taking a good look at the functions from a broader view.

[aegisdesign]

Just to add a counter example where Apple have gone in the right direction (IMHO). File sharing in Leopard.

Pre-Leopard you had 'Personal File Sharing' ie. AFP, 'Windows File Sharing' ie. SMB and FTP. Three options that essentially did the same thing, just using a different protocol. Now it's just 'File Sharing'. They hide the protocol details because it's not important to most people who just want to 'share a file'.

See http://db.tidbits.com/article/9261

(and they brought back OS9 style Folder level sharing - that's worth the upgrade alone for me)

That's what they should be doing with messaging on the iPhone. Simplifying.

[TenoBell]

Chapter marks, closed captions, subtitle tracks, multiple audio tracks are not some mystical concepts that can't or shouldn't be done in video files. I think it's pretty disappointing that this isn't more common.

I see your point but I am sure they are trying to keep the file as small as possible.

But that doesn't mean that the Apple way is ideal, and that's what we were discussing here. I still think the reasons for separation are more because of a certain kind of pragmatism and history, and not out of taking a good look at the functions from a broader view.

Well lets look at it this way. Who has created a better alternative? Windows Media Player does it all but I haven't seen or heard that it works any better than Apple's method. I'm not saying its worse either, but WMP cannot navigate DVD menus with the same sophistication of Apple's DVD Player.

I'm sure there are pros and cons to both ways as I've said.

That's what they should be doing with messaging on the iPhone. Simplifying.

iChat does both IM and SMS so its very possible that they may do the same for the iPhone.

[JeffDM]

I see your point but I am sure they are trying to keep the file as small as possible.

The only thing that changes the file size noticeably is additional audio tracks. iTunes' bit rate would basically mean about 21MB more for a 22 minute show, which on the file I checked, would be a 9% file size increase. Other than that, all the other features are negligible in terms of file size. Even DVD subs are only equivalent to adding a couple second's worth of video for every half hour. Chapter marks and CC would be a few k in size.

[klime]

To find itself in 4th position at its price point is remarkable. Imagine what will happen when Apple goes down market with a iPhone nano. Apple's biggest problem continues to be its sole relationship with AT&T. The fact that 250,000 iPhone are sold but not activated on AT&T pretty much proves the point.

-
iPhone 8GB
MacBook (http://personafile.com/Apple-MacBook-13-inch-display-2.16-GHz-Intel-Core-2-Duo-Black-MB063LLA-P885909100187.htm)13" 2.16GHz Duo
Shuffle - 2nd gen

[HyteProsector]

To find itself in 4th position at its price point is remarkable. Imagine what will happen when Apple goes down market with a iPhone nano.
-

I would love for Apple to come out with an "iPhone nano" but I just don't think it will happen anytime soon. The whole point to making the iPhone was to roll music and phone into one... if you remember... motorola tried this with their "iTunes phone" it was horrible. So in order for Apple to make an iPhone nano, I believe it would still need to have music on it. Unfortunately, I don't see them coming out with a 1 or 2 gig phone... call me crazy. But the whole concept behind the iPhone is that its a convergence device (it lumps together 2 or more devices).

Also, if an iPhone nano did come out I feel very strongly that it would be touch screen and nothing else. Apple hates keys. The touch screen is like their nirvana. I don't think they would regress and ship anything else. A little iPhone nano would be super cool though. Maybe in the next couple of years though... if anything were to make it possible, it would have to be something like this...

http://www.wired.com/gadgets/miscellaneous/news/2007/10/ion_memory :)