Confirmed next-gen Apple iPhone seen in person, disassembled - Page 3

Originally Posted by WilliamG

Why would Apple want to play into the Droid's masculine aesthetic shtick? Will Steve proudly proclaim that the iPhone is no longer a "beauty queen", at the behest of Motorola's sexist advertising?

Are there any real complaints that the iPhone currently looks feminine? Would Apple really go for a "masculine" look, thereby making the device less appealing to half (or more) of their target demographic?

My guess is that Apple would never release something which looked like this.

Originally Posted by DaHarder

To be entirely honest, this looks strikingly similar to a shrunken version of the soon to be released Hp Slate... Interesting Indeed.

Originally Posted by masternav

You have what looks like an iPhone, that when removed from the case looks like no other iPhone out there. So the first thing you do is video it then TAKE IT APART??????

What kind of morons are working over at Gizmodo anyway?? They've already tried to piss in Apple's Wheaties over Job's medical leave, now this? If it truly was an accidental leave-behind and not a plant, Jason Chen's backside will be sued into next Tuesday for taking apart a device he doesn't own and is reported as missing by Apple (allegedly). Unless it was a def plant and this was all staged to make it look "accidental". That is the only way that Jason Chen is off the hook for being foolish enough to crack the case. While I have seen some rather pathetic stuff ooze out of Gizmodo from time to time, I simply cannot believe Jason is THAT stupid.

So you have a choice I guess. Either a plant for the press to get their grubby little hands on a pre-release model to generate mindshare, and Jason Chen is simply a tool following directions about building awareness/speculation prior to the launch announcement.

OR

It was truly an accidental leave-behind, in which case someone from Apple is getting charred by Jobs for being careless and compromising Apple security around advance device work. Therefore Giz and Jason, are now in receipt of missing (reported stolen?) goods and in a fit of abject idiocy decide to blog it, take the thing apart AND take pictures. Something I would have expected my son to do (for example) when he was like 12 maybe. Not the behaviors of responsible adult journalist types (go with me on this one here). Which, for all my criticism of Giz, just doesn't make sense.

Originally Posted by GQB

I'm not sure where the furor comes from on the squareness.
This isn't Apple following Droid or HP, its simply bringing consistency to their entire line.
This looks exactly like the iPad and all of the Macbook line.
They've converted the lost space from the rounded edges into usable space.
Not exactly a big stretch.

My first impression was not positive, but now that I look at it more, it looks just fine to me.

Originally Posted by kotatsu

I thought this had been debunked already as a Chinese iPhone clone?

Originally Posted by kotatsu

I thought this had been debunked already as a Chinese iPhone clone?

Originally Posted by poke

They bought this from someone who claimed to have "found" it when they both obviously knew who it belonged to. No attempt was made to return it to the known owner. How is that not buying stolen goods?

Originally Posted by ascii

Or a shrunken version of the iPad, if the iPad had a flat back.

Apple has a history of using the same design themes across their products. e.g. the white iMac resembled an iPod, and current iMac resembles an iPhone.

Originally Posted by digitalclips

Google need not hire industrial espionage agents just use the Apple Rumor sites for their needs. Sad Apple is so betrayed at every turn these days.

Originally Posted by vinney57

Let the paranoid conspiracy theories abound!

Its clearly real and somebody's fucked up.

It's made a buying decision easy for me but I always feel a little sad when these things leak. Steve so loves his reveals.

Originally Posted by paxman

Or was it an Apple drop? It is hard to imagine Apple letting people run around with the new model. Even JI or SJ would probably not use one in the wild. Now they have guaranteed page up and page down with free advertising, yet no-one is able to run the thing, so the important element (OS) are still hidden.

Originally Posted by FormerARSgm

If there is one thing we all know Apple excels at, it's controlling leakage. Sure, you could argue that Apple is known for occasional 'controlled leaks', but this would be well above that.

My primary doubt comes from the fact that it's highly unlikely someone could get a phone off of the Cupertino campus without setting off bells and whistles. Clearly, there are a few top-level executives that would have a functioning phone for testing purposes and would be allowed to leave campus, but the theory that they might lose on seems extremely unlikely.

One thing is for sure - whether this really is a leaked phone or it's the greatest hoax ever - there's a great story coming.

Originally Posted by reliason

How about this chain of events?

Gizmodo is approached by a 'third party' (well, Apple, actually)
with the opportunity to get a pre-release look at one of the final set of design prototypes.
They are told what cover story to use 'found in a bar'.
They are told what pictures they can take, both assembled and disassembled.
And they have to sign a NDA the length of all US Case law....

BUT they get to generate a huge number of page hits.

During the SAME WEEK that the next generation Droid and the Microsoft KIN hit the news cycles.

Cases for: Quality of pix, device itself, limited exposure (no OS, no pic of CPU), timing.
Cases against: ?

Originally Posted by reliason

How about this chain of events?

Gizmodo is approached by a 'third party' (well, Apple, actually)
with the opportunity to get a pre-release look at one of the final set of design prototypes.
They are told what cover story to use 'found in a bar'.
They are told what pictures they can take, both assembled and disassembled.
And they have to sign a NDA the length of all US Case law....

BUT they get to generate a huge number of page hits.

During the SAME WEEK that the next generation Droid and the Microsoft KIN hit the news cycles.

Cases for: Quality of pix, device itself, limited exposure (no OS, no pic of CPU), timing.
Cases against: ?

Originally Posted by Voltaic

It could very easily be a drop.
They'd just make damned sure it got into the hands of exactly who they wanted it to....say, a technology blog...like, um....I dunno....Gizmodo.

Originally Posted by matrix07

Speaking from designer's perspective, there is no Ive's signature in that design so I call it fake.

Originally Posted by DaHarder

Then why was it FIRST reported by Engadget this weekend as an Exclusive?

Originally Posted by DaHarder

Define - Fake?

Naysay all you want, but there's little room for doubt regarding from where this 'device' originated, and that's directly from Apple.

Originally Posted by WilliamG

And a SMALLER screen? In this day and age of bigger and bigger cellphone screens? I doubt that Apple would go in the wrong direction WRT screen size. There have been countless comments on this forum pointing out that higher resolutions on smaller screens are a waste, and that the results are less than stellar, given the viewing angles and distances.

Originally Posted by matrix07

Fake = not Apple design. If this is a real iPhone 4G then it's the first time Apple go backward design-wise. I think there's a big doubt this is directly from Apple.

Originally Posted by GQB

I'm not sure where the furor comes from on the squareness.
This isn't Apple following Droid or HP, its simply bringing consistency to their entire line.
This looks exactly like the iPad and all of the Macbook line.
They've converted the lost space from the rounded edges into usable space.
Not exactly a big stretch.

Originally Posted by John.B

We all thought the early pics of the iPod nano 3G were fake because it too didn't seem like an "Apple design". I'm skeptical but not sure I'll go so far as to call this a fake...

Originally Posted by matrix07

Speaking from designer's perspective, there is no Ive's signature in that design so I call it fake.

Originally Posted by matrix07

Fake = not Apple design. If this is a real iPhone 4G then it's the first time Apple go backward design-wise. I think there's a big doubt this is directly from Apple.

Originally Posted by NasserAE

Early last year, app trackers did detect the iPhone 3GS around SF area. So it is possible that very few people are allowed to test those devices in the wild. However, I just can't believe that someone with such device would be very careless to lose it! I am not really convince of their story. However, it seems that this is the real deal.

Originally Posted by paxman

I certainly doesn't come across as finished. There may be more refinement going on. But what is Ive's signature? How do you define that? Maybe unfair to Ive if he must be trapped by his own 'signature'. He has done other things than the iMac and MacBooks, remember. A phone has some really technical design requirements. The most important being that it can withstand being dropped from a certain distance on to hard ground landing on one of its corners. That alone eliminates the iMac/macBook glass to metal application.

Originally Posted by Tulkas

Yes, that is true. That's what I meant when I said that once Apple informs the person/party that has it that it is Apple's property, that have a valid charge. But, until then , it is simply lost. Obviously they could assume it was Apple property. At the same time, they were not even convinced themselves whether it was authentic or a fake, so they couldn't reasonably assume it was Apple's.

Now that they have convinced themselves, they should return it. I still don't think they are under a legal obligation to do so until Apple comes forwards, claims it as theirs and requests it back. Just like if you found my phone...you don't know it's mine until I tell you. You could sleuth and find my info on the phone, but that only tells you it might be mine.

Originally Posted by GQB

Um, like getting so drunk in a bar that you lost a multi-million dollar top secret prototype?

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum

Bingo!

I think it is a controlled leak... to create interest in bars in Redwood City

.

Originally Posted by DaHarder

Oh...

You mean like when the 3rd generation iPod Nano met with a less than glowing/favorable reception, and the 4th generation quickly reverted back to the design of the 2nd generation?

Personally, I don't see how this design is the least bit 'backward' given that it looks nothing like any iPhone that came before, and is rather 'forward-thinking' in that it utilizes interior space far more efficiently than the current iPhone by presenting a smaller package with more features and a larger battery.

Originally Posted by matrix07

Fake = not Apple design. If this is a real iPhone 4G then it's the first time Apple go backward design-wise. I think there's a big doubt this is directly from Apple.

Secretary of state for defence Des Browne has admitted that the laptop lost by the Ministry of Defence containing details of up to 600,000 defence personnel was not encrypted, and also that services personnel have previously lost two more laptops containing similar unencrypted recruitment information.