iPhone Specs (official)

Nice. I'm glad I have a ton of iPod connectors...I'm sure people will be wanting cables for their new iPhones =)

i'm kind of suprised there isn't any discussion! People have been wondering about talk time forever. I guess it still doesn't list stand-by time though.

Talk time (and virtually everything else listed there, as far as I can tell) has been up on the iPhone web page for 6 months.

I don't get people anxious about stand-by time though. I mean, presumably it will be utilized for iPod functions as well, in which case it will probably get enough use that stand-by time will be irrelevant. It will simply have to be charged every day.

Any chance we can use the iPhone to give my MBP CD internet at the airport without haveing to purchase WiFi crap from TMobile? Without wires would be awesome too.

Further details from the next post on MacRumors after the spec one.

Yes vibrate, yes syncable Safari bookmarks, no IM chat, no MMS messaging (I think we knew that), no GPS, no TelNav.

Doesn't support what I assume are ATTs overpriced video and image services, so no loss there.

Yeah, I don't think I'd seen that confirmed before.

Thank God. I can't remember how many posts I've seen around the web with people flipping out because "it doesn't even have vibrate".

I like the little intrigue on the page Ireland posted though-- about how features could just show up without warning so be prepared. You have to figure that caveat is coming from Apple, although of course it's no guarantee of anything.

It doesnt have MMS which isnt a big deal.

But that cant be all the specs. It doesnt say anything about video recording, so what it doesnt have it?

As far as I can tell, there are zero new specifications in that list, Dave.

Everything in the list was mentioned during the keynote or on the Apple website. Specifications should include things like processor, processor MHz, LCD TFT performance (brightness, viewing angle), a list of accessories (cables, dock, etc, software CD) that come in the box, all of the iPhone's features, etc. Maybe a list of apps.

It's amazing, but we've pretty much heard zero about the notes application, the calendar application, the camera application, even the calculator application.

In fact, it's so incredibly bad, that we all better start praying Apple/Steve Jobs has one hell of an explanation as to why the iPhone does not have MMS. If not, Apple Inc. (AAPL) is all set up for a huge corporate meltdown. Here's why:

Once upon a time Apple/Steve Jobs was very late to market with CD-burners (I could be wrong about the product/category, but that's beside the point). When they eventually caught up with everybody else, and include it, Apple and Steve Jobs admitted that they had plain and simple missed the point on this new technology.

This situation is very similar, except this time the technology in question is both mature and widely used, and pretty much accepted as a default part in any new phone on the market. With Apple pushing iPhones without MMS they are for all practical purposes screaming to the world: WE DON'T GET IT!!!.

Unlike that previous long forgotten Apple fumble, this time the stakes are an order of magnitude bigger. In other words, take Apples big time hyping of the iPhone as "a revolutionary mobile phone", and subtract from that "WE DON'T GET IT!!!". You don't have to be a genius to see how bad this is going to turn out.

MMS it self may not be very important, but Apple screaming "WE DON'T GET IT!!!" sure as hell is! And if play your hand as aggressive as Apple/Steve Jobs are playing theirs right now, there won't be a second chance...

Two words; Software Update. MMS could be solved with a software update. If iPhone users want it badly enough, Apple will have no choice but to add it.

Two more words; Too late!

A software update may bring MMS to the iPhone, but will not in a million years repair Apples lost reputation in the mobile game.

Mind you, that precious reputation is so far nothing more than hype, and "losing" it over such a brainfart is almost impossible to comprehend.

The iPhone may initially do well in the US, were MMS, as I understand, is not as widespread used as in the rest of the world. However, I fear that Apple will sell very few "revolutionary", MMS-free multimedia-phone in Europe and Asia.

Bottom line (pun intended): Sans MMS (aka. "We have no clue") Apple won't sell anywhere near the estimated 8 million iPhones thru 2008. Further more, it's a pretty safe bet that Apple will get ridiculed non-stop over this, making Microsofts businessplan for the Zune look avantgarde in comparison.

A MMS-free iPhone is not a game-changer. It's a deal-breaker...

Yes, because MMS is highly critical when you have...

1) Rich content email
2) Alternate connection that gets you around the cell company insane data plans (WiFi)
3) Most MMS accounts have an accompanying email address people can alternately mail to

Yeah... that's a real deal breaker there...

The iPhone is looking to do to the cell company lock-in what iTunes Store and the iPod did to the record labels: break some fundamental assumptions about the business models. MMS is just a cell-only attempt (and a poor one at that) at sending around pictures and sound. ZOMG! That's so... so... 1986? MMS/email gateways (both directions) + email relegate MMS to what it really is: a fringe protocol for extremely limited clients. Still useful, I guess, but there's no technical reason why it has to be something off in its own little island.

Pul-lease. MMS is fine for kids to send pictures of their wing-dang-doodles to each other. Mail will include a "send as MMS" for all the people stuck in 2002.

My BlackBerry doesn't have MMS and its really not that big of a deal. Eventually, they have to add it, but I woudl guess AT&T doesn't want 3 million x 30 photo's at 2 MP each clogging their phone system June 29.

It will come.

Okay, I think I have a better way of explaining my thoughts on this.

The cell industry is the new Compuserve.

There's a huge, ubiquitous system out there called the Internet, and billions of people are perfectly happy using it to send email, with video, pictures, audio... you name it. Email can be sent across any number of networking systems, physical infrastructures, and pipes. The endpoints don't, and shouldn't, care where it goes in the middle, or how it gets there. Only that it does.

Contrast this with what the cell companies have built - MMS connects to... other MMS clients. On their network. It's a walled community, in the same way Compuserve was when the Internet was taking off in the commercial and public space. Compuserve held on *so tight* to its domain... although it eventually opened up to sending mail to/from the rest of the internet, it kept the interaction at a minimum, and tried to entice users to stay inside the wall with content, some free, much not. "Why do you want to go out into the big bad internet, when we can get you whatever you need right here? For a low, low price..."

I see SMS/MMS as much the same - it's a closed community, with some minimal interaction with the rest of the electronic world. I don't see it doing any better in the long run.

And for those of you asking "Compuserve who?"... exactly. At one time, they were the largest online community, *the* way that individuals got onto the net. To many people, Compuserve *was* the net, for all intents and purposes. They predated AOL, who almost fell into the same trap, but figured it out just in time.

The cell companies are still in the same mindset: "If we just keep throwing content at our customers, and charge them for the privilege of downloading it, we can keep them happy, tied to us, and most importantly, paying us big bucks for stuff they can get cheaper elsewhere." Look at all of the overpriced ringtones, music videos, movies, etc, that play on these tiny postage stamped screens *and can't be moved anywhere else*, and tell me I'm wrong. I think they're about to be rudely awakened, however. Their walled community just got delivered a Trojan Horse.

So far, all the phone manufacturers have played the cell companies' game, letting them lock down basic functionality to patch the holes appearing in the walls. Bluetooth file transfer? Off completely. File transfer in general? Castrated. By agreeing to get onto a cell network (at least in the US), you agree to have your phone eviscerated, and anything that subverts the cell company's business model is verboten. Now you have this wonderful piece of equipment that the manufacturer is digging its heels in on. No, the cell company cannot rebrand it. No, they may not alter the firmware. In fact, if they want to sell it, they're going to have to change their voicemail servers to cater to *the device*, not the other way around. This is big. This is a major shift in the hardware/network relationship, and, IMO, only Apple could have pulled it off. None of the existing cellphone manufacturers are willing to jeopardize their existing business, MS would make sure the cell companies' interests were taken care of *first*, while Apple is making sure that whatever the cell company does can't interfere with the iTunes Store. From a consumer's perspective though, I'll take the iTunes Store over what the cell industry offers any day, however. Look at it this way - it ensures a supported data path between the phone, the desktop, and the internet. (And that's without even discussing WiFi - the other half of the equation.) Win/win for us and Apple. The cell companies are getting shoved into a new era of business, as I see it, much as the music labels were... the prospect of selling a large number of the units, and getting that many new customers, was too much temptation for them to ignore. The way I see it, in five years, we'll look at cell companies the same way we look at ISPs now - shop around, pick one based on basics such as data speed and cost per month, and that'll be it. We don't buy our computers from our ISPs, and I doubt we'll buy our phones from the cell networks in a few years.

Trojan Horse? Hell, Apple done just delivered them the bomb, in a shiny multi-touch package that was too tasty for them to resist. But, I figure whichever company has the most raw numbers of subscribers after the dust settles will be the winner. AT&T is hoping it will be them. The writing is on the wall, and frankly, it can't get here fast enough.

Kickaha, yeah. And I'm looking forward to long-range wireless internet access everywhere - including voice - so the whole cell business can be dumped like they deserve.

++++

Very true. I don't think we realize yet the importance of whatever Steve worked out with AT&T, or indeed that he could "work out" anything at all.

Think about it-- he basically went to them and said "We have a phone that we have designed to gut your profitable walled garden services. No MMS, no overpriced insanely hard to navigate music store, none of your stupid "video on demand" schemes, no dicking around with computer syncing so people have to pay for your stuff to get things on their cell phones. We think you're better of driving increased subscription rates with this really cool device than you are continuing with your fake, limited functionality version of the internet. If you don't figure this out now, somebody else will pretty soon, and they'll eat you alive."

Or words to that effect. No wonder famously closed system Verizon didn't bite. But what happens when people know people with iPhones, and notice they can do all this cool stuff without the carrier tariff? How long can a Verizon holdout, selling a wildly overpriced, crippled version of what iPhone users are getting for free?

Somehow, Steve made the AT&T brass "get it". RDF and a handgun, is my guess.

Any more news on if the iphone will support video recording?

So no word on if the final version will be able to record video?

I guess we will just have to wait till release day.

Let's hope it does. Given that Apple builds iSights into all their notebooks, video capabilities seem to be pretty important to them. Since most cell phones with a camera can do video, I have to assume that the iPhone will be able to as well.