More Google apps on their way to Apple's iPhone

[AppleInsider]

It won't be long after next month's iPhone launch that several new Google-based applications will begin making their way onto the first-ever Apple handsets via software updates, says an official for AT&T Wireless.

Speaking to The Seattle Times, AT&T's iPhone point man Glenn Lurie said the anticipation mounting ahead of next month's launch has far exceeded his firm's expectations.

The exec, who has been testing an iPhone but declined to produce the unit for a photo shoot, also addressed skepticism regarding the device's high entry-level price point of $500.

"I think when people get their hands on it and really experience it — the touch screen is phenomenal, this touch screen is like nothing you've ever used — to experience that, the skepticism, I think, around some of those things will go away," he said.

There are other things, added Lurie, such as widgets and "some of the Google applications that are coming" that will serve to distance pricing concerns from the minds of consumers.

"There are just so many things here that the price will not be an issue," he said, declining to discuss any plans for subsidies on the handsets.

Lurie also dropped on final tidbit on services plans when asked whether iPhone's full-powered browser capability will soften demand and revenues from existing AT&T services such as directory assistance,

"No, actually it won't. I think it will be great for us, and here's why," he said. "One of the things with this device — people are going to be asked to have an unlimited package — people are going to have to have a package with us to browse."

Apple has said that the iPhone will ship with Google Search and Google Maps but has not commented on plans for any additional applications from the search giant. Similarly, the company has not yet revealed the data plan options and pricing tiers that will be made available alongside iPhone.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[andrewcod]

Digg it

[Restalot]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

"One of the things with this device — people are going to be asked to have an unlimited package — people are going to have to have a package with us to browse."

$599 for the hardware could start to look cheap...

[mrjoec123]

Originally Posted by Restalot

$599 for the hardware could start to look cheap...

$599 for hardware is cheap, compared to the cost of service over the life of the phone.

I don't know why needing unlimited data would be a shock to anyone. If you've ever used a smart phone before, you'll know that paying per megabyte for data makes little sense. The last thing you're going to want to do, especially with a full-featured browser like Safari, is start counting kilobytes like we did in the old days with AOL. You're going to get addicted to surfing and email, and you're going to go over your limit and end up paying even more. Unlimited is the ONLY way to go.

The real question is whether AT&T is going to force iPhone users on their more expensive $40 unlimited data plan, or the cheaper $20 plan that works with most smartphones, including the Treo (although they try to tell you it doesn't). My guess is that they'll be charging $40, or come up with some alternative iPhone-specific plan that's a little less (or even more). But they have no real motivation to offer it cheaper, if you think about it. An iPhone without a data plan would be a real waste of hardware. People are going to want data, and they'll have no where else to get it, other than using WiFi, which will be great, but not always available.

[Ireland]

Originally Posted by Restalot

$599 for the hardware could start to look cheap...

No, but you are getting more than a regular phone. There'll come a time when a lot people will have a 24" desktop at home, and a iPhone-like phone, rather than a laptop, but that's a few years away. The iPhone isn't powerful enough, or the storage isn't big enough yet.

[archer75]

This thing does have wi-fi right? I can surf the web over my own wi-fi network without needing to connect via AT&T's network right?
I could give a rat's ass if I can't connect cellularly to the net. Just need the wi-fi.

It would also be nice if it had user changeable batteries and supported SD cards. And i'm still waiting for word on 3rd party apps. Would be nice to have a reader app for my ebooks and also skype.

[mgkwho]

Originally Posted by andrewcod

Digg it

Why? It's a dupe. Here's the real deal.

-=|Mgkwho

[anantksundaram]

I think the main point behind the pricing -- and Apple has figured this out -- is that people want to own a piece of the future, and hence will be willing to pay an extra couple of hundred bucks as premium.

Why?

So that they can tell their grandchildren, when stuff such as haptics is all the rage: "Look, here's the brick that started it all" (much as it was the case with the original 5GB iPod, which is now a museum piece on my mantelpiece, and a regular conversation piece!).

[GQB]

Originally Posted by archer75

I can surf the web over my own wi-fi network without needing to connect via AT&T's network right?
I could give a rat's ass if I can't connect cellularly to the net. Just need the wi-fi.

Has it been confirmed that iPhone buyers will be allowed to have voice-only service? I agree that I would not be interested in a $$$ sucking data connection, but I've seen nothing confirming that buyers will be allowed to purchase voice-only.

[128pluspb100siduo230]

I like many others want an unlimited plan but I sure hope and expect that Apple had the wisdom to get AT&T to consider consumer level pricing for such a plan. A grand per year per phone for service would certainly limit the widescale appeal of the iPhone.

As a long time Mac user, I started in spring of '84 with a 128, and stock holder I have every expectation that the 1st generation phone will soon be eclipsed and yet I'm tempted to buy 2 on the day of introduction. If I pay 250-599 in annual depreciated cost to own one of these beauties I can justify a simalar amount for service but if the sevice plan approaches or exceeds 80 per month we are looking at a phone that ends up costing around 5% of the average annual wage of a US worker.

I realize the iPhone is intended to be a mass luxury item but the mass will get very small if the price is too high. Apple's 1% goal leads me to believe they may not really care if we can afford this phone. To reach that global goal though they do need high single digit penetration in the US if not double digit. The richest 2% of the global population or about 130 million people could certainly afford the iPhone without blinking and 8% penetration of this market seems an easy reach for Apple. I just hope Apple is looking for greater appeal than that.

My 13 year olds take on this is that if the iPhone is all that it is cracked up to be she could forgo a MacBook as this coupled with an iMac could be an even better solution for her. This in a household with 4 active Mac/PowerBooks and many retired units stretching back to the PowerBook 100. I'm waiting to replace my G4 PowerBook until the iPhone ships as well.

[mrjoec123]

Originally Posted by archer75

This thing does have wi-fi right? I can surf the web over my own wi-fi network without needing to connect via AT&T's network right?
I could give a rat's ass if I can't connect cellularly to the net. Just need the wi-fi.

Allowing AT&T to force users to get an unlimited data plan is probably how Apple convinced AT&T to allow for WiFi on iPhone. Most smart phones don't have WiFi because cellular companies want to make money on data. As long as a data plan is an option, you won't be getting WiFi on your phone. Otherwise, why would AT&T want to support smart phones at all? It's a huge bandwidth and customer service overhead hit for no reward. They need to make that up with more money per month on each smart phone customer.

This is most likely the biggest reason why Verizon and Apple couldn't come up with a mutually-beneficial deal. Verizon is notorious for pushing users into their data network with a fury, even moreso than other companies. I doubt they would have let Apple put WiFi on iPhone for any reason.

[archer75]

Originally Posted by mrjoec123

Allowing AT&T to force users to get an unlimited data plan is probably how Apple convinced AT&T to allow for WiFi on iPhone. Most smart phones don't have WiFi because cellular companies want to make money on data. As long as a data plan is an option, you won't be getting WiFi on your phone. Otherwise, why would AT&T want to support smart phones at all? It's a huge bandwidth and customer service overhead hit for no reward. They need to make that up with more money per month on each smart phone customer.

This is most likely the biggest reason why Verizon and Apple couldn't come up with a mutually-beneficial deal. Verizon is notorious for pushing users into their data network with a fury, even moreso than other companies. I doubt they would have let Apple put WiFi on iPhone for any reason.

I do believe apple said the iphone's do have wifi.
And there was the rumor that AT&T will also let users get the pay as you go plan for the iphone. Though nothing offical.

[desarc]

i don't care about surfing the web on the iPhone. i just want to have a single item in my pocket instead of my iPod and my phone. my phone can only hold 100 songs and i can't wait to toss out the moto UI. i'm definately NOT in the 1% you speak of, but i can afford 50 - 60 a month for a plan. [i don't want to spend that much, but i can definately afford it.] still if i can pay per use for the net, that's what i'll do. i would only want it for google maps when i'm lost wandering around the north end of boston.

[mrjoec123]

Originally Posted by 128pluspb100siduo230

I realize the iPhone is intended to be a mass luxury item but the mass will get very small if the price is too high. Apple's 1% goal leads me to believe they may not really care if we can afford this phone. To reach that global goal though they do need high single digit penetration in the US if not double digit. The richest 2% of the global population or about 130 million people could certainly afford the iPhone without blinking and 8% penetration of this market seems an easy reach for Apple. I just hope Apple is looking for greater appeal than that.

I agree that Apple is looking for a wider appeal, but they won't get it initially. In a year or two, there will be many more iPhone users, and more smart phone users in general, but for the first six months to a year, iPhone is going to be a luxury item. Once they get a strong enough foothold with the early adopters, they'll have more clout to take back to the negotiating table.

Jobs has been doing this for years. He did it with Disney and Pixar. He did it with the Big 5 record labels. It's what makes his stock options money well spent. He knows how to make a few hard compromises on the initial deal without compromising the essentials. Then when his insane vision proves to be correct, he walks back into the room for the extended deal and gets pretty much whatever he wants.

iPhone will eventually be as cheap as a RAZR is today, but that's going to take some time. Meanwhile, I'm more than happy to pay the price for early adoption.

[JeffDM]

Even if cost of bandwidth isn't a concern, latency might still be an issue if you have to use EDGE. So far, pervasive WiFi still seems to be largely a pipe dream. Google apps are nice on good broadband, but the times I've used them in bandwidth-constrained situations just taught me not to use them in those situations at all.

[mrjoec123]

Originally Posted by archer75

I do believe apple said the iphone's do have wifi.
And there was the rumor that AT&T will also let users get the pay as you go plan for the iphone. Though nothing offical.

Yes. iPhone has Wifi. That's a fact. And that's my point. If iPhone has Wifi, then AT&T has to force users to get a data plan, or else it loses money. Expect to be forced into a data plan.

[wilco]

Originally Posted by mgkwho

Why? It's a dupe. Here's the real deal.

-=|Mgkwho

He's not real clear on the concept. I've noticed the same thing on other threads.

[Slewis]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

Even if cost of bandwidth isn't a concern, latency might still be an issue if you have to use EDGE. So far, pervasive WiFi still seems to be largely a pipe dream.

It's not a pipe dream, it's just not needed because WiMax is just around the corner. Personally I'd take WiMax to the last mile or better yet, directly to my Macbook rather than DSL or WiFi any day. I'd cut my Airport Express/2WIRE from the Internet altogether and build a local network based around WiFi and Bluetooth, and WiMax for Internet.

Sebastian

[Porchland]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

"There are just so many things here that the price will not be an issue," he said, declining to discuss any plans for subsidies on the handsets.

"We actually considered charging $10,000 per phone, but dealing with the loan documents was just going to be too much of an administrative burden."

[jwdsail]

""One of the things with this device — people are going to be asked to have an unlimited package — people are going to have to have a package with us to browse."

Was he stroking a cat when he said this? With a straight face?

ATT didn't quite finish embarrassing themselves at the Macworld Keynote, eh? Every-time they open their mouths re: the iPhone, foot flies in, lol...

(Bond villain voice) So, no matter if you use it or not, you vill get our data plan, if not ve have vays of dealing vit you... (end Bond villain voice) (pushes button, and our hero drops into an alligator pit)

If I've said it once, I'll say it a million times... The iPhone will flop for no other reason than people like me refuse to do business with these A$$HOLES at Cingular/ATT... All cell phone companies (at least here in the US) are A$$HOLES, but these guys turn it into an art form. Can't believe Apple gave them a 5 year exclusive..

[nevenmrgan]

Nice thread about everything in the world except Google apps on iPhone.

I wonder if Lurie was talking about Google's web apps, like Docs & Spreadsheets? It would be interesting if Apple said, ok, you want to develop third-party apps? Put them on the web, and here's our spec sheet on how to make them shine in Safari on iPhone. It doesn't strike me as the Apple way of doing things, but who knows.

I also wonder just how usable the darlings of Web 2.0 will be on iPhone - you know, Flickr, Google Reader, even things as simple as Twitter. If Safari on iPhone is fast enough and smart enough, it might be interesting to make widget-sized web apps instead of actual widgets (Lord knows those sometimes take longer to refresh than an actual web page).

[TBaggins]

Originally Posted by jwdsail

Was he stroking a cat when he said this? With a straight face?

ATT didn't quite finish embarrassing themselves at the Macworld Keynote, eh?

Remember, it has to be a fluffy, white cat (though Dr. Evil's hairless cat was a cute parody of the original):


Typical ATT excecutive

And yes, ATT did embarrass themselves at Macworld. Stan Sigman's several minutes on stage felt more like several years. Some people should just not be allowed to do public speaking.

.

[breeze]

Originally Posted by desarc

i don't care about surfing the web on the iPhone. i just want to have a single item in my pocket instead of my iPod and my phone. my phone can only hold 100 songs and i can't wait to toss out the moto UI. i'm definately NOT in the 1% you speak of, but i can afford 50 - 60 a month for a plan. [i don't want to spend that much, but i can definately afford it.] still if i can pay per use for the net, that's what i'll do. i would only want it for google maps when i'm lost wandering around the north end of boston.

HOW ABOUT GPS VOICE GUIDED TRIPS (as in GARMIN) ???

[2112]

Originally Posted by archer75

This thing does have wi-fi right? I can surf the web over my own wi-fi network without needing to connect via AT&T's network right?
I could give a rat's ass if I can't connect cellularly to the net. Just need the wi-fi.

It would also be nice if it had user changeable batteries and supported SD cards. And i'm still waiting for word on 3rd party apps. Would be nice to have a reader app for my ebooks and also skype.

Why is a rat's ass so underrated?

[melgross]

Originally Posted by breeze

HOW ABOUT GPS VOICE GUIDED TRIPS (as in GARMIN) ???

I'm pretty sure it has A-GPS.

[Flounder]

Originally Posted by 2112

Why is a rat's ass so underrated?

Mmmmmmmmmmmm rat's ass.................

[melgross]

Originally Posted by Flounder

Mmmmmmmmmmmm rat's ass.................

Is that with butter and garlic?

[melgross]

Here we are, talking about WiFi vs. 3G, and other technologies such as WiMax, which I'm invested in.

But, I just now came across this article. Some here may know about the court battle over these patents, but Nokia's new statement makes it even more interesting for the future of high speed, and subsequently, the iPhone itself.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...ad-for-3g.html

[Slewis]

Originally Posted by nevenmrgan

Nice thread about everything in the world except Google apps on iPhone.

I wonder if Lurie was talking about Google's web apps, like Docs & Spreadsheets? It would be interesting if Apple said, ok, you want to develop third-party apps? Put them on the web, and here's our spec sheet on how to make them shine in Safari on iPhone. It doesn't strike me as the Apple way of doing things, but who knows.

I also wonder just how usable the darlings of Web 2.0 will be on iPhone - you know, Flickr, Google Reader, even things as simple as Twitter. If Safari on iPhone is fast enough and smart enough, it might be interesting to make widget-sized web apps instead of actual widgets (Lord knows those sometimes take longer to refresh than an actual web page).

I'm pretty sure they meant actual Widgets. Remember, the iPhone has Cocoa and it has Widgets, therefore you can develop for it. Further making my point, in Leopard you'll be able to sync Widgets to a .Mac account, not only that, but Google is Apple's partner in the iPhone, so even if Apple never releases an SDK to the public, Google still has their own.

If you want my guess, Google is probably going to be pushing their current mobile offerings onto the iPhone. I doubt we'll see their Gmail Java App since Mail is already there and it would be completely redundant. Google Calendar will likely integrate with the Calendar app, so straight from their mobile page, Search and Maps is already there, so that leaves News, SMS, and Blogger, SMS is there just because the iPhone has SMS messaging, They'll probably have a Blogger widget, and News? Either integrated into Search or in a Widget of it's own.

Yahoo may be developing for iPhone as well, although if you ask me I think the only reason they got in is because of their partnership with AT&T. They talked a bit about OneSearch so that may be the Yahoo search engine they actually implement (Google will be the default period) they might develop a Local widget as an alternative to Google's widget, IM probably won't exist on the iPhone. So the other tabs on their mobile page are Flickr, News, Sports, Finance, and Entertainment. Flickr I see as a shoe in, and I'd rather not see the others or guess at them.

Originally Posted by TBaggins

And yes, ATT did embarrass themselves at Macworld. Stan Sigman's several minutes on stage felt more like several years. Some people should just not be allowed to do public speaking.

.

I absolutely agree. I mean the man actually pulled out NOTE CARDS!!

Sebastian

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by Slewis

It's not a pipe dream, it's just not needed because WiMax is just around the corner. Personally I'd take WiMax to the last mile or better yet, directly to my Macbook rather than DSL or WiFi any day. I'd cut my Airport Express/2WIRE from the Internet altogether and build a local network based around WiFi and Bluetooth, and WiMax for Internet.

I no longer have any faith in WiMax, it was "just around the corner" for three years now. So far, good, widespread WiFi mesh really has been a pipe dream. From what I've heard, most of them are pretty crappy, even the one backed by Google.

[mowenbrown]

I just noticed my customized google home page is now "iGoogle".
when did that happen?

[TBaggins]

Originally Posted by Flounder

Mmmmmmmmmmmm rat's ass.................

Originally Posted by melgross

Is that with butter and garlic?

Uhhh... suuure, yeah, that's what we meant. Heh. As food. Yes. The other way would be disgusting. Heh.

*runs*

.

[TBaggins]

Originally Posted by melgross

Here we are, talking about WiFi vs. 3G, and other technologies such as WiMax, which I'm invested in.

But, I just now came across this article. Some here may know about the court battle over these patents, but Nokia's new statement makes it even more interesting for the future of high speed, and subsequently, the iPhone itself.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...ad-for-3g.html

Oh, the patent-pissing between the various 'fathers of 3G' has been going on for some time, Mel. And in all such battles, its mostly about money.

But it won't derail 3G, simply because there's too much money invested worldwide in 3G. In Europe, in the US, in Japan, etc., many carriers have all plunked down several billion a piece (and in Europe, have bought some TREMENDOUSLY expensive [by US standards] 3G spectrum that cost them many billions more). No one is going to lets those investments just get flushed down the toilet.

When one of the patent bully boys says "this could help WiMax" its more a PR tactic (designed to get a settlement) than reality. They're hoping to score points, they're not truly that worried about Wi-Max, at least not yet.

Don't get me wrong, WiMax could still make an impact, especially in certain developing nations that don't have huge, rich, established carriers who are heavily invested in 3G. But in most rich nations, 3G just has trememendous inertia on its side. AND WiMax is a bit late to the party, as most rich nations have 3G widely-deployed already.

Its just going to be tremendously hard for WiMax to dislodge that, which is part of why we've seen a steady ratcheting down of pro-WiMax hype in the past year or so. That and the fact that WiMax has been slower to get to market than anticipated.

This is not to say that WiMax couldn't still have some moderate successes here and there, though, and I personally think it will co-exist nicely with 3G in certain nations; but the days when folks honestly though it could waltz in and eat 3G's lunch are pretty much gone.

.

[Slewis]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

I no longer have any faith in WiMax, it was "just around the corner" for three years now. So far, good, widespread WiFi mesh really has been a pipe dream. From what I've heard, most of them are pretty crappy, even the one backed by Google.

Bleh, I haven't been following it as long, but I do know that Sprint-Nextel is working on it right now, so that's at least one service provider (but we do need more then that) and Intel did delay their WiMax offering in Santa Rosa... which pissed me off but none the less, AMD isn't even trying. Hopefully it'll be widespread by the time I start looking for a new laptop in about 18 months (I artificially limit the life span of any computer to 2 years)

Originally Posted by mowenbrown

I just noticed my customized google home page is now "iGoogle".
when did that happen?

4/30/07 at 8:59 PM Pacific Standard Time.

In other words, almost a month ago.

Sebastian

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by mgkwho

Why? It's a dupe. Here's the real deal.

-=|Mgkwho

I don't know, Digg is so stupid that I now regret posting there after I've sworn off it. It's not really worth arguing on or about.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

So that they can tell their grandchildren, when stuff such as haptics is all the rage: "Look, here's the brick that started it all" (much as it was the case with the original 5GB iPod, which is now a museum piece on my mantelpiece, and a regular conversation piece!).

Haptic... Most devices called haptic devices that I've seen are force feedback type, or that the feedback is through the sense of touch. I've never thought of iPhone as potentially being called haptic.

[GregAlexander]

Originally Posted by nevenmrgan

Nice thread about everything in the world except Google apps on iPhone.

Good point

Originally Posted by nevenmrgan

I wonder if Lurie was talking about Google's web apps, like Docs & Spreadsheets? It would be interesting if Apple said, ok, you want to develop third-party apps? Put them on the web, and here's our spec sheet on how to make them shine in Safari on iPhone. It doesn't strike me as the Apple way of doing things, but who knows.

I also wonder just how usable the darlings of Web 2.0 will be on iPhone - you know, Flickr, Google Reader, even things as simple as Twitter.

I'm really against the heavy bandwidth requirements of web apps. I'd like to think I can download a series of apps (widgets?) optimised for the iPhone, and then have them update their data with minimal bandwidth (and thus high speed).

I expect that some parts of the iPhone will really shine - particularly the iPod music & video and the phone itself. The custom apps & web apps will need fine tuning, and I suspect the custom apps will be reasonably good. Apple will learn ALOT in the next few months about Web 2.0.

[GregAlexander]

Originally Posted by TBaggins

This is not to say that WiMax couldn't still have some moderate successes here and there, though, and I personally think it will co-exist nicely with 3G in certain nations; but the days when folks honestly though it could waltz in and eat 3G's lunch are pretty much gone.

I think 3G is really sorting out it's data abilities. WiMax seems to still promise cheaper data (though this may be changing... is one inherently cheaper?).

I'd be happy with
* Standard 2G phone
* Free/cheap High speed Wifi from local access points
* Cheap/Slower WiMax when away from local access points.

I don't think it'll happen, but I'd be happy.
And I'm pretty certain Apple will not be the one to do that combo!

[Flounder]

Originally Posted by TBaggins

Uhhh... suuure, yeah, that's what we meant. Heh. As food. Yes. The other way would be disgusting. Heh.

*runs*

.

Speak for yourself

[TBaggins]

Originally Posted by Flounder

Speak for yourself

Hey, you brought it up. I just exploited it for comedic purposes.

.