iPhone SDK evidence Apple has learned from past mistakes

[AppleInsider]

The iPhone software developers kit (SDK) introduced by Apple on Thursday is proof the company is determined not to replicate mistakes made during the onset of its Mac platform, investment bank Piper Jaffray said Friday.

In research note released to clients, analyst Gene Munster said the announcements represent a substantial investment in creating a robust developer community aimed at producing a feature-rich mobile software platform, for which the iPhone and iPod touch are the first beneficiaries.

"Whereas Apple lacked a full developer community for the Mac in the 1980s, the company is taking precautions not to let limited developer support hinder the iPhone platform," he wrote. "The platform with the most active developer community will likely win the battle in the mobile computing arena."

In addition, Munster said the proliferation of third-party applications is a critical step in the future of the iPod, which has been met with its first signs of demand softness over the past several quarters. He believes the advent of "this feature-rich Internet-connected platform," coupled with lower pricing, will inevitably spark a new chapter of growth for the devices which have recently shown signs of flirting with their saturation point in the market.

However, some challenges to this approach remain, according to the analyst, such as cost reduction. For example, a tear-down analysis of the iPhone and iPod touch suggests that Apple pays $15 for the Wi-Fi module in the devices and roughly $30 for the touch-screen.

"For a $99 or $149 iPod, these costs apply margin pressure that will force Apple to innovate around the idea of an Internet connected iPod, which requires a larger screen than current iPod nanos, and an improved user input interface (like multi-touch technology)," Munster wrote. "We believe Apple is developing such solutions that will enable the company to deliver lower cost, Wi-Fi connected iPods in the near future."

The analyst also advised clients that the company has licensed Microsoft's ActiveSync technology, and thus plans to include support for enterprise-grade "push" email as part of a June software update to the iPhone. Nevertheless, he said, Apple still faces an uphill battle against Blackberry maker Research in Motion (RIM), whose approach towards push email funnels messages through Network Operations Center (NOC) in Canada, which is less taxing on its handset's battery life and thus results in an excellent user experience.

"So, the new iPhone features put the device on equal footing with Windows Mobile devices, but RIM offers a unique solution for enterprise customers," Munster explained. "Additionally, most businesses using the Blackberry platform have also purchased specialized hardware, which represents a significant hurdle for widespread iPhone adoption in business environments. Apple's move enables the iPhone to begin competing with Blackberry and Windows Mobile, but some hurdles to adoption remain, like the cost of the iPhone."

In a research note to his own clients, American Technology Research analyst Shaw Wu shared a similar view on the matter.

"From the demo and our checks with beta testers, Apple's implementation of ActiveSync appears superior to existing ActiveSync implementations by other vendors," he wrote. "[However,] we continue to believe it is difficult to replicate Blackberry's robust push e-mail, but iPhone has improved their product and is preaching the benefits of a simpler architecture [...]. While this is an improvement, Apple has a long road ahead in making inroads in Enterprise."

Both Munster and Wu maintained their Buy rating on shares of Apple, making no changes to their model. However, both said Thursday's announcements reinforce their convictions that Cupertino-based company is well on its way to surpassing its goal of selling 10 million iPhones in calendar year 2008.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[ravelgrane]

Apple still faces an uphill battle against Blackberry maker Research in Motion (RIM), whose approach towards push email funnels messages through Network Operations Center (NOC) in Canada, which is less taxing on its handset's battery life and thus results in an excellent user experience.

Can someone explain what this means? What is NOC and how does it help the battery life of a phone?

[ravelgrane]

some hurdles to adoption remain, like the cost of the iPhone

I dunno. At $399 the iPhone seems pretty competitive. The main cost seems to be the flash RAM, and that should be falling steadily in the future. And anyway, the real cost is the subscription, which around $60 a month adds up to around $1500 over 2 years. That's very competitive. So what exactly are these guys complaining about?

[Ronbo]

Originally Posted by ravelgrane

Can someone explain what this means? What is NOC and how does it help the battery life of a phone?

Someone with real knowledge of the matter will likely give a lot better answer, but I think the basic idea is: with an NOC, if your device is asleep (or out of range), the message gets cached on a server, and when your device is in back on, it can then get its messages gracefully. Without an NOC, the device has to keep a little more power going to some of its chips, continually listening for messages.

I think that's what they're talking about. Anybody out there, feel free to obviate this explanation with a better one

[wbrasington]

Originally Posted by ravelgrane

Can someone explain what this means? What is NOC and how does it help the battery life of a phone?

The best way to understand this is to watch the streaming presentation Apple made.
It's available on their website.

[wtbard]

Whereas Apple lacked a full developer community for the Mac in the 1980s

I don't agree with this. I was a novice programmer at the time and I felt that Apple and others provided plenty of info to develop applications for the Mac. I've had more trouble learning Cocoa now than I did back in the 1980's. I wish I had held onto the Phonebook though (this was a phonebook looking thing that had all of the system routines).

[fdavila]

The iPhone SDK is NOT limited to an iPhone. The iPod Touch can use it.

AND, so can any of a number of any size mobile devices.....iTablet for example.

All that is missing is Ink implementation as input mode. SInce it is OS X Ink is already there.

[Ronbo]

Originally Posted by ravelgrane

I dunno. At $399 the iPhone seems pretty competitive. The main cost seems to be the flash RAM, and that should be falling steadily in the future. And anyway, the real cost is the subscription, which around $60 a month adds up to around $1500 over 2 years. That's very competitive. So what exactly are these guys complaining about?

I watched the Quicktime video from yesterday. Up until then, I naively thought that the "iPhone isn't Enterprise-ready" crowd wasn't appreciating the full power of the iPhone. But after seeing that list of features they're gonna add to the 2.0 iPhone OS, I became convinced that I simply don't know anything about that world. OMG that's a lot of stuff you need to have a business-friendly phone! I decided at that point that I just needed to hear what the analysts say about business needs and not pass judgment. One of two things will happen. First, it might be like the iPod, where the criticism demonstrated short-sightedness on the part of the analysts, and it turned out that there was sufficient value in the product after all to warrant sales. Or second, it might be that the analysts are right and Apple will have to bend somewhere. I suspect it's gonna be #1. I take it from your post that you're of a like mind. But if we're wrong, Apple will adjust. (There's a third option that I think is very unlikely: the price is wrong, and Apple lets the product die because they can't admit it. That might have happened 10-15 years ago, but this is a different company )

[Ronbo]

Originally Posted by fdavila

The iPhone SDK is NOT limited to an iPhone. The iPod Touch can use it.

++
It's really surprising how many people have asked the "what about iPod Touch" question. For those of you with a Touch, be at your ease. You'll be playing Super Monkey Ball too

[serpicolugnut]

my favorite part...

The analyst also advised clients that the company has licensed Microsoft's ActiveSync technology, and thus plans to include support for enterprise-grade "push" email as part of a June software update to the iPhone. Nevertheless, he said, Apple still faces an uphill battle against Blackberry maker Research in Motion (RIM), whose approach towards push email funnels messages through Network Operations Center (NOC) in Canada, which is less taxing on its handset's battery life and thus results in an excellent user experience.

...results in an excellent user experience? Yeah, I guess. Unless the NOC goes down (like it has numerous times over the last year), leaving users unable to get to their email for hours at a time (and in a couple of cases, days).

Yeah, that's an excellent user experience.

Sorry, having a single point of failure like RIM has with their system is not an excellent user experience. If Apple's implementation is as smooth as they showed yesterday, RIM's last advantage will be only to those who don't like the touchscreen keyboard and prefer the tactile Blackberry keyboard.

[solipsism]

The iPhone SDK is top notch. I wasn't expecting such a feature rich SDK to come out yesterday.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by serpicolugnut

...results in an excellent user experience? Yeah, I guess. Unless the NOC goes down (like it has numerous times over the last year), leaving users unable to get to their email for hours at a time (and in a couple of cases, days).

Yeah, that's an excellent user experience.

Sorry, having a single point of failure like RIM has with their system is not an excellent user experience. If Apple's implementation is as smooth as they showed yesterday, RIM's last advantage will be only to those who don't like the touchscreen keyboard and prefer the tactile Blackberry keyboard.

So that was a dig at RiM, I thought so but wasn't sure.

[anantksundaram]

Notwithstanding the many valid comments above, I do have to note that these two guys - Munster and Wu, whom I have dumped on in the past - are sticking to their guns about Apple.

Nice to see that analysts can occasionally lead (than always follow) with their views on a company.

[stevesabol]

I don't understand why these analysts think RIM vs iPhone is an all-or-nothing thing. There is zero cost in infrastructure for supporting the iPhone. That's what the flowchart during the presentation was all about... there's no need for the NOC or an iPhone-equivalent to the Blackberry (relay) server. The iPhone talks to the Exchange server directly.

We had Win98 in our organization for years... transitioned slowly to XP. IT didn't one day say "every computer will now have XP!" Since the iPhone has zero infrastructure cost there is no barrier to phasing it in... to trying it and see how a few execs/sales people like it.

Now of course there is support overhead for the iPhone so there is added time for the IT department. But they won't have the order big expensive servers.

The other thing I keep coming back to: unless I'm missing something on this junk BB device I have sitting in a drawer, I can't access legitimate web apps (or useful third party apps) on it. I truly foresee the iPhone as a 75% replacement for a laptop while on the road once I have CISCO VPN and Exchange support on it in addition to the true web functionality it has. The ads right now say "internet in your pocket" but it should say "computer in your pocket".

[deanbar]

Originally Posted by fdavila

The iPhone SDK is NOT limited to an iPhone. The iPod Touch can use it.

AND, so can any of a number of any size mobile devices.....iTablet for example.

All that is missing is Ink implementation as input mode. SInce it is OS X Ink is already there.

I've noticed on various blogs that many people were unsure whether the SDK was also available for the iPod Touch. Just to make it clear, right at the end of the Quicktime video presentation yesterday, Jobs confirmed that the same SDK will be available for the Touch, but at a small fee due to Apple's accounting idiosyncracies!

I have to say that the Quicktime Video presentation was amazing, and should definitely be viewed.

I've been waiting for this SDK to come out so I could buy one for my wife, but I've read that the volume is very poor. Can anyone confirm this, please? Thanks for any info on this....

[Daffy_Duck]

Originally Posted by serpicolugnut

my favorite part...
...results in an excellent user experience?

Try setting your iphone to check email every 5 minutes and compare the battery life to manual email check. It's a huge difference. I'm guessing this is what they are referring to as a longer battery life does lead to an improved user experience. Server outages are temporary annoyances. Short battery life is a permanent annoyance. We will have to wait and see how the battery is affected by push email on the iPhone.

[jawporta]

Looks like it was worth the wait. I'm selling my PSP.

[Foo2]

I'm no expert on this, but it seems to me, the NOC approach is intended to carry out functions that the cellular service provider could do better--and will do better. As such, NOCs will soon be a thing of the past, and the native approach to be used by the iPhone in just a few months' time will quite possibly be more reliable. Not to mention less expensive.

[CanadianMac2008]

Originally Posted by deanbar

I've noticed on various blogs that many people were unsure whether the SDK was also available for the iPod Touch. Just to make it clear, right at the end of the Quicktime video presentation yesterday, Jobs confirmed that the same SDK will be available for the Touch, but at a small fee due to Apple's accounting idiosyncracies!

I have to say that the Quicktime Video presentation was amazing, and should definitely be viewed.

I've been waiting for this SDK to come out so I could buy one for my wife, but I've read that the volume is very poor. Can anyone confirm this, please? Thanks for any info on this....

The SDK is not something you buy for your wife or somebody else. First of all, it is free. Second, it is only for people who want to write applications for the Touch/iPhone. In June, you will gain the ability to add such applications to your Touch or iPhone. Until then, some people will be able to test their applications on the devices if they have the proper authorization - all others must test theirs using the simulator included with the SDK.

In short, this is probably not for you. Wait till June, when you will pay a small fee and get iPod Touch Software version 2.0 for a small price.

[Bageljoey]

Originally Posted by CanadianMac2008

The SDK is not something you buy for your wife or somebody else.

I took his post to be saying that he was waiting for the SDK to come out before buying his wife an iPhone. This is supported by his concern about the volume on the iPhone at the end.

Now, why this poster would be waiting for an SDK (and not the actual applications) before purchasing for a third party is an open question. Maybe he just wanted to be sure Apple was serious about 3rd party support before he bought...

Any info in the iPhone volume anyone?

[malax]

Originally Posted by Daffy_Duck

Try setting your iphone to check email every 5 minutes and compare the battery life to manual email check. It's a huge difference. I'm guessing this is what they are referring to as a longer battery life does lead to an improved user experience. Server outages are temporary annoyances. Short battery life is a permanent annoyance. We will have to wait and see how the battery is affected by push email on the iPhone.

That doesn't make sense to me. We have "push phone calls" (the phone rings when you get a call you don't check every minutes to see if somone is calling) and that's not a huge battery drain.

[bsenka]

Originally Posted by ravelgrane

I dunno. At $399 the iPhone seems pretty competitive.

As a standalone replacement handset, it is. Problem is, Apple won't allow carriers to subsidize the cost on contracts. I know a lot of people with Blackberries, and none of them (individuals or companies) paid anything for the handsets.

[JupiterOne]

Originally Posted by Bageljoey

Any info in the iPhone volume anyone?

I think the volume is pretty low for listening in anything but a near quiet setting. Sometimes I like to listen to a podcast while I have a long drive. To hear it over the road noise, I have to have the volume at maximum and hold it just a few inches away from my ear. But if you're at home or somewhere where there is not a lot of background noise, it should be OK.

[kcmac]

Anyone that thinks Apple will do anything with Exchange that would provide a bad user experience is fooling themselves. I am betting once again, that when you actually see it in operation these pundits and other skeptics here will soil themselves about how good it is.

I am just hoping our IT people will let our exchange server (ES) push to my iPhone. I am betting not. (We are an all PC company and we just recently went with Blackberry which cost a pretty penny).

Even though it is intuitively clear that getting info directly from ES to iphone is more secure than from ES to NOC to Blackberry. That extra step I think, was a pretty big deal in Apples presentation yesterday.

[Abster2core]

Originally Posted by bsenka

As a standalone replacement handset, it is. Problem is, Apple won't allow carriers to subsidize the cost on contracts. I know a lot of people with Blackberries, and none of them (individuals or companies) paid anything for the handsets.

Are you under the impression that those handsets are "free?"

[Bageljoey]

Originally Posted by Abster2core

Are you under the impression that those handsets are "free?"

The point might be that if your work covers the monthly payments and the price of the handset is incorporated in (subsidized by) the monthly payments, then the handset is, for all intents and purposes, free for the user.

Just a guess

[deanbar]

Originally Posted by Bageljoey

I took his post to be saying that he was waiting for the SDK to come out before buying his wife an iPhone. This is supported by his concern about the volume on the iPhone at the end.

Now, why this poster would be waiting for an SDK (and not the actual applications) before purchasing for a third party is an open question. Maybe he just wanted to be sure Apple was serious about 3rd party support before he bought...

Any info in the iPhone volume anyone?

Yes, sorry Bageljoey,I obviously didn't explain myself clearly. All I wanted to be sure by the release of the SDK that Apple was truly opening up the iPhone/iTouch to a broad spectrum of apps before buying an iTouch. Now that I'm more than satisfied with what Apple will be providing, I may go ahead and purchase it now (25th anniversary coming up), knowing that come June or soon after, many apps will be available.

My only reservation is reports that the volume is poor.

Quote - JupiterOne
"I think the volume is pretty low for listening in anything but a near quiet setting. Sometimes I like to listen to a podcast while I have a long drive. To hear it over the road noise, I have to have the volume at maximum and hold it just a few inches away from my ear. But if you're at home or somewhere where there is not a lot of background noise, it should be OK."

Thanks JupiterOne, but the iPhone is different to the Itouch in that respect, you have to have earphones for the iTouch to listen, but I'm not interested in buying one if the volume is poor, as I've read, but this was only one person's review that I have seen. Have not seen anyone else commenting on this so I'm interested to find out.

Anyone with an iTouch like to comment?

[Abster2core]

Originally Posted by Bageljoey

The point might be that if your work covers the monthly payments and the price of the handset is incorporated in (subsidized by) the monthly payments, then the handset is, for all intents and purposes, free for the user.

Just a guess

But as we all know, that it isn't the case. Much like buying a new car when the salesman says, "Heck, I'll throw in a GPS." Ask him for the cash instead and see what you get. Nothing.

Or better yet, music played on a radio is free.

In the case above, there is a cost for the handset. I'll bet that the carrier or the manufacturer isn't giving it away.

[onceuponamac]

Originally Posted by ravelgrane

Can someone explain what this means? What is NOC and how does it help the battery life of a phone?

NOC refers to RIM's centralized servers - with RIM - you subscribe to blackberry servers owned by RIM - all email is directed through RIM's servers. If you use outlook active synch - you can push email, calendar, contacts - with out a third party server solution (such as RIM or Goodlink).

[Dave K.]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

The iPhone software developers kit (SDK) introduced by Apple on Thursday is proof the company is determined not to replicate mistakes made during the onset of its Mac platform

Really? I can't see too many enterprise customers giving Apple any real consideration.

Apple has never taken business customers seriously with the Macintosh or Mac OS X. That is why they have failed and continue to fail in business.

Is Apple going to provide enterprise customers with a real road make for their future products or make them wait for Macworld like we do? Can you imagine a major enterprise player placing an order for 25,000 iPhones only for Apple to announce iPhone 2.0 two months later at MacWord 2010? HP, Dell, RIM, Intel, Palm, MS, etc. provide such roadmaps to its customers.

Is Apple going to implement real hardware/software obsolescence plans for their products or are they just going to drop support like they do now? Remember how badly Apple handled the iSight camera and AirPort wireless NICs? Is Mac OS 10.3 officially support still? What about 10.2?

Is Apple going to force companies to do business with AT&T only (in the US) or are they going to allow enterprise customers a choice of carriers?

The list goes on.

I like the idea of SDK. I think it has some really great potential. I can see lots of new kinds of shareware being developed for the iPhone/iPod Touch. But I don't think there will be much interest in the enterprise sector...

Dave

[sapporobaby]

Originally Posted by Ronbo

Someone with real knowledge of the matter will likely give a lot better answer, but I think the basic idea is: with an NOC, if your device is asleep (or out of range), the message gets cached on a server, and when your device is in back on, it can then get its messages gracefully. Without an NOC, the device has to keep a little more power going to some of its chips, continually listening for messages.

I think that's what they're talking about. Anybody out there, feel free to obviate this explanation with a better one

A NOC is a Network Operations Center. Used primarily to monitor network performance, isolate faults, repair them, provide provisioning supervison.

Where he made the leap to battery conservation is beyond me. Most devices that are email capable can poll for their mail upon waking from a sleep state. The iPhone can be set to poll for mail. This is pull rather than having the email pushed down to you.

[Davewrite]

I was reading an article that the number of Enterprises that actually provide cell phones to their employees (and those with extensive hardware infrastructure) is actually quite small. Even Rim is now aiming for people who buy their own cell phones who might want to access corporate email. Blackberry only has 12 million users now, there's a billion in the general cell-phone market. Apple wants corporate business I'm sure but I think their plans are much larger than fighting Rim. Apple is into mobile-computers than "can also be hand-phones". When component prices drop as they will and Apple iDevices become "cheap" -the last major barrier to the mass cellphone market: 'Price' will be gone - Apple is going to rule as no one can match Apple's tech advantage.

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by Dave K.

Is Apple going to provide enterprise customers with a real road make for their future products or make them wait for Macworld like we do? Can you imagine a major enterprise player placing an order for 25,000 iPhones only for Apple to announce iPhone 2.0 two months later at MacWord 2010? HP, Dell, RIM, Intel, Palm, MS, etc. provide such roadmaps to its customers.

You're right about this. Are enough large corporations willing to deal with Apple's penchant for secrecy regarding product direction? We'll see over the next year or two.

[iBill]

Originally Posted by Dave K.

Really? I can't see too many enterprise customers giving Apple any real consideration.

Apple has never taken business customers seriously with the Macintosh or Mac OS X. That is why they have failed and continue to fail in business.

Is Apple going to provide enterprise customers with a real road make for their future products or make them wait for Macworld like we do? Can you imagine a major enterprise player placing an order for 25,000 iPhones only for Apple to announce iPhone 2.0 two months later at MacWord 2010? HP, Dell, RIM, Intel, Palm, MS, etc. provide such roadmaps to its customers.

Is Apple going to implement real hardware/software obsolescence plans for their products or are they just going to drop support like they do now? Remember how badly Apple handled the iSight camera and AirPort wireless NICs? Is Mac OS 10.3 officially support still? What about 10.2?

Is Apple going to force companies to do business with AT&T only (in the US) or are they going to allow enterprise customers a choice of carriers?

The list goes on.

I like the idea of SDK. I think it has some really great potential. I can see lots of new kinds of shareware being developed for the iPhone/iPod Touch. But I don't think there will be much interest in the enterprise sector...

Dave

Did you watch the QT of the SDK announcement? If not, you should.

I'm certain that time will prove you wrong on your assertions.

[sapporobaby]

Originally Posted by Foo2

I'm no expert on this, but it seems to me, the NOC approach is intended to carry out functions that the cellular service provider could do better--and will do better. As such, NOCs will soon be a thing of the past, and the native approach to be used by the iPhone in just a few months' time will quite possibly be more reliable. Not to mention less expensive.

NOC's are here to stay. As I posted earlier they serve a vital function in either a fixed or mobile network environment.

[sapporobaby]

Originally Posted by malax

That doesn't make sense to me. We have "push phone calls" (the phone rings when you get a call you don't check every minutes to see if somone is calling) and that's not a huge battery drain.

Cell networks use ISDN protocols. They are always on in a sense waiting. The D-Channel does the OBS. Once a call build is received the phone rings, etc, etc, etc..... In essense the phone is always checking to see if it can make calls, receive calls, receive calls from a certain number, where is it currently, etc... These little things add up to battery drainage.

[sapporobaby]

Originally Posted by Dave K.

Really? I can't see too many enterprise customers giving Apple any real consideration.

Apple has never taken business customers seriously with the Macintosh or Mac OS X. That is why they have failed and continue to fail in business.

Is Apple going to provide enterprise customers with a real road make for their future products or make them wait for Macworld like we do? Can you imagine a major enterprise player placing an order for 25,000 iPhones only for Apple to announce iPhone 2.0 two months later at MacWord 2010? HP, Dell, RIM, Intel, Palm, MS, etc. provide such roadmaps to its customers.

Is Apple going to implement real hardware/software obsolescence plans for their products or are they just going to drop support like they do now? Remember how badly Apple handled the iSight camera and AirPort wireless NICs? Is Mac OS 10.3 officially support still? What about 10.2?

Is Apple going to force companies to do business with AT&T only (in the US) or are they going to allow enterprise customers a choice of carriers?

The list goes on.

I like the idea of SDK. I think it has some really great potential. I can see lots of new kinds of shareware being developed for the iPhone/iPod Touch. But I don't think there will be much interest in the enterprise sector...

Dave

True, true, true.

[iBill]

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

You're right about this. Are enough large corporations willing to deal with Apple's penchant for secrecy regarding product direction? We'll see over the next year or two.

Actually, with regard to iPhone, Apple has been reasonably non-secretive about their plans. They pre-announced the product itself, including the model/price/feature set and some detail of the carrier model, and the plan for subscription accounting and software update. They pre-announced the SDK. They pre-announced their time-table for launches in new markets. They have already announced that they will launch a 3G model and (roughly) when. They now have pre-announced the next software update, when it will be available, and what it will entail. Additionally, there have been pre-announcements by developers of SDK based product availability.

What's more, by claiming the "Apple is too secret" mantra, you're making a sweeping assumption that simply cannot be supported in fact. That is to say, simply because of how Apple has operated in the past with Macintosh, or iPod, or whatever, therefore it "shall" be going forward with iPhone and the enterprise. Not necessarily so, and I say time will bear out that Apple is serious about establishing iPhone in the enterprise.

Mark my words.

[suhail]

Originally Posted by Dave K.

Really? I can't see too many enterprise customers giving Apple any real consideration.

Apple has never taken business customers seriously with the Macintosh or Mac OS X. That is why they have failed and continue to fail in business.

Is Apple going to provide enterprise customers with a real road make for their future products or make them wait for Macworld like we do? Can you imagine a major enterprise player placing an order for 25,000 iPhones only for Apple to announce iPhone 2.0 two months later at MacWord 2010? HP, Dell, RIM, Intel, Palm, MS, etc. provide such roadmaps to its customers.

Is Apple going to implement real hardware/software obsolescence plans for their products or are they just going to drop support like they do now? Remember how badly Apple handled the iSight camera and AirPort wireless NICs? Is Mac OS 10.3 officially support still? What about 10.2?

Is Apple going to force companies to do business with AT&T only (in the US) or are they going to allow enterprise customers a choice of carriers?

The list goes on.

I like the idea of SDK. I think it has some really great potential. I can see lots of new kinds of shareware being developed for the iPhone/iPod Touch. But I don't think there will be much interest in the enterprise sector...

Dave

- Could you please show us road-maps for HP, Dell, RIM, Palm, and MS?
- I remember processor roadmaps that were given to Apple by Motorola and IBM... Yeah not very reliable.
- Apple still supports early versions of OS X on their website, click on Apple's Support-tab, on the LHS you'll see a drop-down menu where you can select "Mac OS X 10.2 and earlier"

[Ireland]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

"So, the new iPhone features put the device on equal footing with Windows Mobile devices...

Not true, these new features make the iPhone more attractive than Win mobile devices, as the general consumer who has a job in the enterprise likely wanted an iPhone but couldn't get one before. They now can. People "want" an iPhone, nobody "wants!" a Win mobile device.

Don't underestimate desire [along with needed functionality] in really build this iPhone business, it's going to play a huge part. People love the iPhone, and for good reasons.