iPhone 3.0 listings show four all-new iPhone, iPod touch models

[AppleInsider]

Tucked within Apple's iPhone 3.0 beta firmware are hardware strings that mention not one but two unreleased iPhone models as well as similar changes in store for the iPod touch.

An exploration of device strings by the same source that correctly leaked MMS and tethering ahead of Apple's iPhone 3.0 preview event now finds that there are at least four and as many as six new devices in the pipeline that would share OS X iPhone as their foundation.

Again speaking to Boy Genius, the insider notes that the previously discovered iPhone 2,1 has been joined by iPhone 3,1 as well as iPod 2,2 and iPod 3,1. As Apple always uses the first number in these device identifiers to refer to major revisions, the naming schemes allude to a second major reworking of the iPhone in testing at Apple as well as a minor revision of the current iPod touch and a third-generation overhaul.

The original iPhone shows in these listings as iPhone 1,1, while the iPhone 3G appears as iPhone 1,2 -- a minor upgrade to an existing design. The first- and second-generation iPod touch show as 1,1 and 2,1 respectively.

What an additional iPhone revision would involve isn't clear. Despite persistent claims of a smaller and lower-cost iPhone, Apple has publicly embraced a one-size-fits-all approach and has shot down rumors when brought up by one analyst in its latest fiscal results conference call.

Potentially more intriguing are two new devices that don't fit into either the iPhone or iPod categories. One, referred to as iProd 0,1, is a complete mystery and suggests an early prototype rather than a finished device. An iFPGA device doesn't include any model revision numbers but appears to reference a field-programmable gate array, or a chip whose functions can be reprogrammed either by the user or the manufacturer after it's created.

It's unclear whether these are actual placeholders for future products, references to individual components for other devices, or else serve an entirely different purpose. However, the sudden ballooning of device string entries hints that iPhone 3.0 may be used as the foundation for a much larger platform expansion rather than a simple upgrade for Apple's existing handhelds.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[ltcommander.data]

If I'm not mistaken FPGA's are a lot more expensive than a regular fixed function chip and are really only used for prototyping. It's unlikely that the iFPGA is going to be a real product, especially one that end users can reprogram.

Maybe the iPod 2.2 and iPhone 2.1 are Nano designs based on current-gen technology, while the iPhone 3.1 and iPod 3.1 will be getting the hardware overhaul.

[dommy-D]

Could iProd be the purchase of the forthcoming firmware 3.0 for previous-gen iPhones? Kinda like an upgrade from Tiger to Leopard. Another way for APPl to make some $...

[Virgil-TB2]

Unless they are testing this firmware against multiple future generations of devices this could indicate Apple splitting the line into a regular and a "pro" product couldn't it?

• iPhone 1,1 = iPhone
• iPhone 1,2 = iPhone 3G
• iPhone 2,1 = iPhone 3.0
• iPhone 3,1 = iPhone 3.0 Pro

• iPod 1,1 = iPod touch G1
• iPod 2,1 = iPod touch G2
• iPod 2,2 = iPod 3.0
• iPod 3,1 = iPod 3.0 Pro

[rhymeswithluck]

iProd?

for once, apple is having a laugh at us, the string PRODDERS.

c'mon, everyone. let's laugh with apple laughing at us.

shares back up to 150 before we know it!

[ltcommander.data]

Originally Posted by rhymeswithluck

iProd?

for once, apple is having a laugh at us, the string PRODDERS.

c'mon, everyone. let's laugh with apple laughing at us.

shares back up to 150 before we know it!

Hopefully Apple doesn't start sending cease and desist orders to all stores that claim to sell "Products" because it sounds too much like iProd. Just like they did for Podium versus iPod.

[psychodoughboy]

All I know is that I'll be watching the model numbers from whatever gets announced this summer with great interest. If they're working on iPhone 3,1 already at this early date I'd feel mighty leery about picking up an iPhone 2,1.

[cbw87]

Originally Posted by psychodoughboy

All I know is that I'll be watching the model numbers from whatever gets announced this summer with great interest. If they're working on iPhone 3,1 already at this early date I'd feel mighty leery about picking up an iPhone 2,1.

+1, might be satisfied with the 3.0 software update whilst remaining on my cheap unlocked contract and hold out for a potential 3,1. Interesting stuff.

[GregAlexander]

Originally Posted by dommy-D

Could iProd be the purchase of the forthcoming firmware 3.0 for previous-gen iPhones?

I figure it's a code name something different that we haven't seen yet, ie: "the next 'i' Product".

iPod, iPhone.. the release name could easily be iBook or iPad, or whatever.

[GregAlexander]

Originally Posted by psychodoughboy

All I know is that I'll be watching the model numbers from whatever gets announced this summer with great interest. If they're working on iPhone 3,1 already at this early date I'd feel mighty leery about picking up an iPhone 2,1.

Weird version numbers huh?

I wouldn't be surprised to see them jump straight to 3 with the iPhone. They did it with some of their iLife applications to bring them in line. Good idea to pay attention to those numbers though.

[hill60]

iNetbookthat'snotgoingtohappenprod?

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by rhymeswithluck

iProd?

for once, apple is having a laugh at us, the string PRODDERS.

c'mon, everyone. let's laugh with apple laughing at us.

shares back up to 150 before we know it!

Probably short for "iProduct"... meaning, a test name.

[jamisen.sc]

didn't they just order 10" screens? could they be for one of these "placeholders?"

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...y_product.html

[djames42]

I'm thinking that Apple, knowing how people read through code looking for scraps, has inserted some phony product codes just to see the speculation (that's going on right here, right now)

[VinitaBoy]

Oh, crap, dommy-D! Apple making money? Damn! How evil and capitalistic is THAT?

Hey, got an idea for ya', d-D: DON'T BUY IT! Don't upgrade from Tiger to Leopard! Don't upgrade from Leopard to Snow Leopard! Don't buy anything from anybody! THAT'll show 'em!

[Cubert]

Originally Posted by ltcommander.data

Hopefully Apple doesn't start sending cease and desist orders to all stores that claim to sell "Products" because it sounds too much like iProd. Just like they did for Podium versus iPod.

[anantksundaram]

Originally Posted by rhymeswithluck

iProd?

for once, apple is having a laugh at us, the string PRODDERS.

c'mon, everyone. let's laugh with apple laughing at us.

shares back up to 150 before we know it!

I want it back at $200. Won't be satisfied until then..... my rule is, no more than 2 shares of AAPL per iPhone.... er.... iProd...

[quinney]

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

Probably short for "iProduct"... meaning, a test name.

That was my first thought too. They were just testing the ability to quickly add new products
to the OS (although that, in itself, is encouraging)

I wonder if the iFPGA device is there as a test of allowing device makers to have access to
the dock connector??????

[czfyjf]

Lots of Google results for iProd along these lines:

iProd

[quinney]

Originally Posted by czfyjf

Lots of Google results for iProd along these lines:

iProd

Aha! You may be onto something

[McDave]

Originally Posted by ltcommander.data

If I'm not mistaken FPGA's are a lot more expensive than a regular fixed function chip and are really only used for prototyping. It's unlikely that the iFPGA is going to be a real product, especially one that end users can reprogram.

Insert Papermaster HW here. Though it would be cool if it were an FPGA-based production unit. Shape-shifting hardware, how green is that?

McD

[jamisen.sc]

Originally Posted by czfyjf

Lots of Google results for iProd along these lines:

iProd

good call. the added accessory API could make this happen.

[dapple]

The rumored iTable or even an enterprise iPhone running industry specific apps in enterprise settings could explain the FGPA, no?

[teckstud]

iProd sounds like a sexual device used in Alien 3 or by the OctoMom.

[teckstud]

Originally Posted by dapple

The rumored iTable or even an enterprise iPhone running industry specific apps in enterprise settings could explain the FGPA, no?

iHungry- I need some iFood.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by teckstud

iProd sounds like a sexual device used in Alien 3 or by the OctoMom.

Symbian is a mobile OS and an automated sex machine.

[teckstud]

Originally Posted by solipsism

Symbian is a mobile OS and an automated sex machine.

[astrosmash]

Models not listed:

iPod 3,2
iPod 4,1
iPhone 3,1
iPhone 3,2

You saw it here first.

[mason2046]

The OS was refered as iPhone OS instead of OS X, as previously used by Jobs, but Forstall said in the preview that iPhone is not the only device that runs iPhone OS. Of course, when he said that, he meant there's iPod touch too. But actually he really was hinting something else.

I think in the future Apple will have two OSes they can market, the Mac OS X and the iPhone OS, which will represent the best mobile computing platform(for developers to make money) and experience(for consumers), so there would be no risk to cannibalize Apple's high profit mac sales. And the success of App Store, made this all possible.

By the way, could anybody explain field-programmable gate array? What does this mean to the coming device?

[melgross]

Originally Posted by McDave

Insert Papermaster HW here. Though it would be cool if it were an FPGA-based production unit. Shape-shifting hardware, how green is that?

McD

Shape shifting technology?

You asked for it!

The PCs of the future could be more flexible in every way -- even physically. For starters, they'll have adjustable screens that users can stretch, roll or unfold to open.

"So you can contort that device and make it bigger, maybe widen it to 6 inches tall and 10 inches wide so you can watch TV or access information through wireless broadband or peer-to-peer technology," says Sam Driver, an analyst at research firm ThinkBalm in Little Compton, R.I. "Then say you take that device to your office, you can stretch it and start working, and you can have it communicate in the office with printers and other devices."

But that's just the beginning. Researchers are working on programmable products that contain embedded microprocessors and storage in the material itself. The material would be programmed to change shape based on the user's needs, Chien explains.

For example, you could morph your smartphone into a Bluetooth headset and then into a remote control by just touching a button on the device. Think of it as the ultimate Transformer toy.

Link:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/16132...cade_away.html

This is a very interesting read!

[melgross]

Originally Posted by mason2046

The OS was refered as iPhone OS instead of OS X, as previously used by Jobs, but Forstall said in the preview that iPhone is not the only device that runs iPhone OS. Of course, when he said that, he meant there's iPod touch too. But actually he really was hinting something else.

I think in the future Apple will have two OSes they can market, the Mac OS X and the iPhone OS, which will represent the best mobile computing platform(for developers to make money) and experience(for consumers), so there would be no risk to cannibalize Apple's high profit mac sales. And the success of App Store, made this all possible.

By the way, could anybody explain field-programmable gate array? What does this mean to the coming device?

The aTv uses it too.

[ajm]

iFPGA is probably to allow access for plug-in accessories or their prototypes.

iProd is probably a placeholder name for some up-and-coming Apple product that may not ever pass Jobs' muster. Possibly a tablet, a la 10" iPod touch (Newton MessagePad reprise)

iPhone 2,1 is inevitable, but one can only imagine what changes would constitute a major revision if 3G was considered minor. That makes 3,1 even more confusing. Pro? Nano? Hard-drive based? High-def, titanium unibody with Atom dual core? Who knows.

Symbian is an OS, but the sex device is named Sybian.

AppleTV doesn't run iPhone OS, it runs Tiger.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by ajm

Symbian is an OS, but the sex device is named Sybian.

You're correct. I've only heard in mentioned (and used) on The Howard Stern Show, but never looked it up before.

AppleTV doesn't run iPhone OS, it runs Tiger.

I'm sure Melgross was referring to the OS being OS X, not that the AppleTV runs the iPhone OS.

[mason2046]

Originally Posted by melgross

Shape shifting technology?

You asked for it!



Link:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/16132...cade_away.html

This is a very interesting read!

That's awesome! but that's too far away, I think what Apple should really do in reality about the iPhone 3,1 is bring some of their own super cool patents to life. One of my favourite is the camera-within-display thing. I always get annoyed by the fact that you can't look at someone in the eye in a video chat.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by mason2046

That's awesome! but that's too far away, I think what Apple should really do in reality about the iPhone 3,1 is bring some of their own super cool patents to life. One of my favourite is the camera-within-display thing. I always get annoyed by the fact that you can't look at someone in the eye in a video chat.

First things first. I want Apple's patent for a small backlight over a small area of the display to come to fruition. This way you can see messages, the time, etc without turning on the full screen display.

[Rot'nApple]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Tucked within Apple's iPhone 3.0 beta firmware are hardware strings that mention not one but two unreleased iPhone models as well as similar changes in store for the iPod touch.

What two products? You mean like the iPhone 16GB and 32GB? Same for iPod Touch??

[dmon]

Apple tends to take the long view when designing products and more specifically software and structural systems (iPhone OS, iTunes Store, etc.) I was wondering if there are reasons for developing the Push Notification System the way they have that will become apparent when they start rolling out new categories of mobile devices (Tablets, Netbooks, 3G enabled laptops, etc.)

Is this the basis of a new type of functionality that has broader implications than what we're seeing on with the iPhone OS 3.0? It seems that they are taking on a lot of responsibility / liability with this type of network and I'm not sure they would have done it if there weren't bigger rewards down the road. Are there ways that this back-end system could give them a big leg up on the competition? Any ideas?

[melgross]

Originally Posted by dmon

Apple tends to take the long view when designing products and more specifically software and structural systems (iPhone OS, iTunes Store, etc.) I was wondering if there are reasons for developing the Push Notification System the way they have that will become apparent when they start rolling out new categories of mobile devices (Tablets, Netbooks, 3G enabled laptops, etc.)

Is this the basis of a new type of functionality that has broader implications than what we're seeing on with the iPhone OS 3.0? It seems that they are taking on a lot of responsibility / liability with this type of network and I'm not sure they would have done it if there weren't bigger rewards down the road. Are there ways that this back-end system could give them a big leg up on the competition? Any ideas?

It's basically what you said. But they didn't expect the interest to be as high as it turned out to be, so they had to do a total revision of the way their servers handled the throughput.

There's no doubt that push will be very important to business, as well as to consumers. Companies can use it for almost anything. Stock prices, sports scores, weather forecasts, customer contacts. New recordings or books from people you might be interested about.

People might use it with social networking, to keep their friends updated on where they are, etc.

That's just a very few of the things I'm already thinking about.

Ideas will come from directions no one has thought about.

[dmon]

Originally Posted by melgross

It's basically what you said. But they didn't expect the interest to be as high as it turned out to be, so they had to do a total revision of the way their servers handled the throughput.

There's no doubt that push will be very important to business, as well as to consumers. Companies can use it for almost anything. Stock prices, sports scores, weather forecasts, customer contacts. New recordings or books from people you might be interested about.

People might use it with social networking, to keep their friends updated on where they are, etc.

Ideas will come from directions no one has thought about.

So, is this a more flexible system than what RIM has? I hear the argument that RIM's push email is more sophisticated than Apple's but maybe it is much more limited and that the limitations will begin to become apparent over time as there are more and more ways in which Apple's Push is used that RIM's can't? I'm not knowledgeable about RIM's system - does anyone know if this is a fair analysis?

[Chris_CA]

Originally Posted by ltcommander.data

Hopefully Apple doesn't start sending cease and desist orders to all stores that claim to sell "Products" because it sounds too much like iProd. Just like they did for Podium versus iPod.

It's nto simply because it sounds similar. If the Podium was a watermelon slicer or bug zapper, Apple (likely) wouldn't have done anything.