Apple's iPhone to wirelessly stream YouTube content - Page 3

I think Apple would have definitely very seriously thought about Macromedia. However, with its longer term plans vis-a-vis (spelling?) iPhone, iTunes, Leopard, etc, too much to handle going into 2009/2010.

The most important thing around Macromedia selling time was Adobe and Macromedia software being solid Universal Binaries, which they pretty much are now. CS3 is WAAAAY, like a million times plus one, more stable than CS2 Rosetta. The designers in our office pretty much stopped complaining about their iMac 17" Core2Duos (our budget not that huge) since I requested 2GB RAM for them, and more so no complaints and more productive since the bosses encouraged install of CS3.

Santa Rosa iMacs and dropping 2GB RAM prices will see some kickass iMac 20" 4GB RAM machines. Run Parallels, have many CS3 apps open at once, plus browsers, chatting, office (2008!! arrghh come already), etc etc.

Actually, more like "only in the US, and only under HSDPA/UMTS" (i.e. ATT's 3G).

Sprint and Verizon's EVDO 3G networks have pretty good coverage now, and should be very good by the end of the year.

Even so, Apple should've considered going HSDPA/EDGE with the iPhone, like Samsung did with the Blackjack. Battery life may have been a concern (3G uses a lot of power, and the iPhone has a huge, power-draining screen already), but even so, the ability to switch back and forth between 3G and EDGE would've been awesome. \

It's not like ATT's 3G coverage is going to suck forever. Should be decent (or close) in a year. But I guess they wanted to insta-obsolete all the iPhone 1.0s, so iPhone 2.0 sales would be even higher?

Brrr-rrr. I hope Apple really isn't that eval.


.

I'm sure obsoleting the first gen iPhone is a good part of the plan. That is kinda evil. The thing is, the market is so craving something like this that Apple could be good in this sense, get something out there on 2G EDGE, and yes, in 2G not 3G mode my SonyEricsson V600i lasts a whole lot longer, and all I sacrifice is some choppy blocky video clips *and* unusable "video chat" *and* exorbitant data costs.

We need to move past this rubbish small-screen 3G nonsense onto proper [3G unlimited data plans fast internet on your mobile device] stuff. This will leapfrog WiFi and WiMax in terms of convenience and coverage, if it doesn't already.

Mobility is the new black going into 2008. Desktops will be more related to those that do regular office job hours and in any case these desktops at home, work, or in retail, will also act as internal servers (distributed file storage, for TimeMachine, web host testing devices, personal/family/corporate video/music/movies, etc. etc.) ... with the real hardcore "server in server room" stuff for production-level enterprise/internet-wide 24/7/365 stuff.

OMG why do I sound like I'm writing a brochure....???

sry, double post.

Yup. So glad I'm not getting iPhone 1.0. The planned obsolescence angle may make Apple a lot of money, but it sure isn't playing nice with customers... and may hurt them in the end, if any credible competitors step forward faster than anticipated. \


A brochure? LOL, maybe. But the point you make is a very good one. Apple should commit to mobility across its lineup. Even MacBooks should be able to take advantage of 3G cards (and rumor has it Apple will be doing this- kinda points out the silliness of arbitrary lack of upgradability, don't it though?), and of course it goes without saying that the next iPhone MUST be 3G. And if WiMax amounts to anything, Apple should support it also, and not be the last to do so.

"Broadband anywhere" is going to be a fairly big deal. Apple should be in the front of the parade.

.

Well every electronic product we buy has some type of planned obsolescence. What would be the point of Playstation 3 or XBox 360? None of us have any idea when Apple would introduce a new iPhone. The video iPod has not had a major update in nearly two years.

Apple has said each iPhone will receive free software upgrades for two years. Which means Apple needs to put in hardware today that will handle new software two years from now. Apple may not make a radically new iPhone in that time.

Not adding Flash is a strategic move for Apple. Personally, I'm glad as I find Flash much more of an annoyance than a welcome addition to a webpage.


Intel is doing this. Remember Centrino and how Intel added 802.11 to their chips? Santa Rosa was originally going to have HSDPA and WiMax. Obviously, neither happened, but they are still working to get them ready for the next platform due out next year.

Don't cha love it? If Apple revamps a product quickly they are screwing the customer; if Apple doesn't revamp a product quickly they are screwing the customer.


Did they say two years or is that speculation? They have moved to a new 24 month accounting system and have stated they will offer free upgrades, but I don't recall an appended timeframe.

Heh. ...By the way YouTube showed up in AppleTV w00t.

Well, obviously. But there's planned obsolesence, and then there's near-instant obsolescence. No 3G on the iPhone is an example of the latter, insofar as the 'Internet in your pocket' aspect of it goes.

Take a look around... even midrange US phones far cheaper than the iPhone have had 3G on them for a year now, higher-end phones, two years. WiFi isn't really a good stop-gap... as Forbes says, its not as common as people think and is often not free.

Given that, and the fact that not having 3G leaves the only real door open to a competitor (imagine a touch-screen 'iPhone wannabe', cheaper, and advertising that its '10x faster' than the iPhone, by virtue of having 3G), Apple will have to come out with a 3G iteration of the iPhone reasonably quickly, likely within a year.

To use your own example, its not so much like releasing a PS3 or Xbox360, but releasing a PS3 or Xbox360 with dial-up only, and then next year, releasing one with broadband. Ugh.

And somewhat unnecessary, considering that there are phones that do HSDPA(3G) and EDGE, and that the major drawback of going 3G (battery life) appears to be less of an issue than previously thought, considering that the iPhone is now posting batt life specs that are quite a lot better than its competition (8 hours talk time, etc.)



See above... they'll likely have to come out with iPhone 2.0 before then. And ATT's 3G coverage will be decent within a year, not two. I highly doubt ATT'll want said 3G network to go untapped by the iPhone for long, when an iPhone 2.0 could be helping them sell even more data plans.

Finally, supporting a product with free software updates for two years doesn't mean that you you're not bringing out new models before then. If you bought a Mac when Tiger first came out, you've been receiving free sofware updates to Tiger for over two years now, with 10.4.10 being posted just a day or two ago.

So, did Apple stop bringing out new Macs since early-2005? \

.

More like, if they release a product that they know will be insta-obsoleted, they are screwing the customer. \

Don't get me wrong, as an iPod and as a phone, the iPhone will still be very good, of course. But not going HSDPA(3G)/EDGE on a $500-600 phone, when competing phones (such as the Blackjack) have been doing this for 6 months now, and with battery life on the iPhone turning out to be very good, i.e. apparently able to handle 3G's power drain?

I dunno solip... I have to wonder what they were thinkin'.

Perhaps they didn't get the power management thing well and truly down until recently, and originally thought that battery life might end up being far less, which would then rule out power-hungry 3G... and of course the iPhone does not have a removable battery, so the usual 'carry a spare batt to swap in and out' solution that works for other phones is a no-go here.

Now it turns out that the power situation is probably fine... and just in time to release a 3G iPhone in Europe and Asia, which are more advanced markets than the US, and where a lack of 3G really would hurt the iPhone a very great deal.

It all kind of comes together... 'cept that iPhone 1.0 users in the US are kinda screwed, as you say, if they're really interested in the Internet experience of the thing.

.

Flash is good to have, though. For example, a lot of CBT (computer-based training) relies on it, because nearly every web browser supports Flash, and the movie file sizes you get with it are nice n' small.


WiMax I knew about (Intel is heavily into pimping it), but HSDPA I did not. Good stuff. I'd hope they'd also have EVDO 3G support for the US, as here it is far more widely-deployed than HSDPA is.

Rumor has it that Apple is going to be including a 3G card adapter for MacBooks in the coming months (perhaps next revision), so whichever way we get 3G, it should all be good. *crosses fingers*

.

Ditto that.

I bet we will see Flash on iPhone pretty soon. I remember when the first Intel Macs shipped they had a beta Flash plugin. Adobe is a little slow sometimes.

m

No. Only for ATT.

That's not what I said. I don't see how you could have gotten from what I did say, to that.

Network is network. does it matter whether it's from the PC Ethernet network, the WiFi PC network, or any other network? No, of course not.

I didn't mention the phone, because we weren't taking about the phone, but the same thing applies, obviously.

Some of you guys not in the US have a strange view of what is actually happening here. It seems as though a few who are here do as well. I suppose that's true because those here who have this odd view don't have a cell network that does have 3G over most of its range (ATT), or don't want to pay for it, so don't understand what's available.

They all do. Let that be clear.

ATT has the least developed 3G network, by far. Don't compare the US to anywhere else by what you've heard about ATT.

I'm waiting too.



Apple's machines can take advantage of any 3G cards that will fit in the slot, and have drivers.

Sprint, for example, lets me use my Treo 700p as a Bluetooth modem for any Mac having Bluetooth. That way I can use Sprints EVDO network.

So, it's not really up to Apple. That's what their WiFi, Bluetooth, and 34 pin slot are for.

That's only one scenario. There are a couple of ways it could go. Apple could release the iPhone on June 29th with 3G hardware. And use a firmware update later to activate it.

Apple could release phones in Europe and Asia without 3G, and roll out 3G on future models of the phone. There is no way for us to know at this point exactly what will happen.




Which phones support 3G? Which phones support EDGE? Which phones even support WiFi?


I doubt simply a touchscreen 3G phone will out-compete the iPhone. Very very few people (in the US) actively search for phones that have 3G, or base their phone buying decisions on 3G.


My point is that its pure speculation at this point. They may, they may not.


The computer market is entirely different from the handheld electronic market. The fact that the video iPod has not received a major upgrade in two years while facing new competition is more akin to how the iPhone will compete.

Smart man. Though I may be grousing a bit overmuch... EDGE may not be all that bad. It just won't be anywhere near good, either.



Yep, but with MacBooks (not MB Pros), the only slot is already taken up by the Airport Extreme card. So you end up choosing between having WiFi and 3G. For a lot of people that sucks, because they have cable modems and wireless routers, like me.

I get 6 Mbps at home via my wireless router. With current 3G, I'd be getting around one-tenth that. But of course I still want the 3G when I'm out and about. So I want both WiFi and 3G.


Yeah, that is a good solution... but of course, not everyone has a bluetooth 3G phone yet (though they should, dammit ).

And bluetooth (the spec is evolving) seems like could lag behind 3G.... your Treo 700p's BT 1.2, for example, is fine for EVDO Rev A, but won't come close to taking full advantage of Rev B (9 Mbps!!), which should start rolling out late this year (I won't even get into Rev C/UMB, which is scary-fast). And its not like your phone is ancient by any means... came out only a year ago.


Well, in the case of MacBooks (not MB Pros, which have a slot other than the Airport card slot), I'm happy to hear that Intel plans to integrate 3G and WiMax into future chipsets, and that Apple is thinking of including a seperate 3G card adapter/slot.

.

I don't think they can do that. 3G requires a separate and different radio from GSM/GPRS/EDGE. One that I don't think is in the iPhone.


I highly doubt it. Europe and Asia are more advanced cellular markets than the US, where expectations (and competition) are higher for phones, and where 3G is well-established. Releasing the iPhone in those markets without 3G is suicidal, and Apple understands this.



Not a great graphic, considering that it missed the fact that the Samsung Upstage is 3G. \
It's also missing key competitors like the Samsung Blackjack, Motorola Q, Blackberry 8830 and Treo 700 series, all of which are 3G. In other words...

Its just not a good or representative graphic. Most smartphones are 3G these days, and have been for awhile. Ditto even midrange flip phones. Feel free to look around and verify this.

A somewhat better graphic (that could easily be larger than 20 phones, its just that's what searches on PhoneScoop are limited to):

http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/fin...y&f6r=r&f46r=r


... As you can see, there's no shortage of high-end 3G phones these days.



Yes, and few people think $500-600 is a good price for a cell phone too.

Point is, the iPhone's customer base are high-end customers, i.e. the kind who actually do care about things like 3G.

Far as competitors go, an alternative doesn't have to be better than the iPhone, it merely has to be 'good enough' while being cheaper, touchscreen, and 3G. That is what all the major phone makers (Nokia, Motorola, LG, Samsung) are stampeding towards. They know they can't out iPhone the iPhone.



They kind of have to. Lack of 3G hurts them some even in the US, due to the high-end nature of the market segment they're going after.

I dunno Teno... late this year/next year, 3G is going to 9 Mbps, at least. What does Apple do, say that dial-up speed (EDGE) is just tres awesome? Hem and haw and say, "Well, there's a lot of them there coffee house hot spots, an' some of 'em are even free."?


You know as well as I that the current vid Pod upgrade cycle is

1) far from ideal, and only acceptable due to its competition being weak (hi Zune)
2) rather unique, in that the vid Pod is waiting on a touchscreen makeover, and can't debut earlier than late this year, for fear of upstaging/cannibalizing the iPhone

And not the same thing as the computer market? I'm not sure anymore. Given the iPhone's price point and the fact that its more computer than cellphone (runs OS X and the 'real Internet'), I'd have to say the two markets are converging some, at least for the products Apple makes. In any case, free software updates for iPhone 1.0 for two years still in no way prevent Apple from coming out with an iPhone 2.0 whenever it feels it needs one... which will likely be sooner than later.

.

We'll see in a few days.


That's true. I don't like WiFi at home anyway. I wired my house for 1Gb Ethernet.


Outside, except in certain, limited areas, and circumstances, WiFi simply doesn't exist. 3G will be a far more USEFUL choice.


These things are coming. In a few, short, years, we will have what we want. These are all still relatively new technologies. It takes time until they're deployed, and even longer before most people understand, and want them.


I'm sure that we will see all of these technologies integrated.

While that won't make people who want it NOW happy, that's the way it always is, isn't it?

Well, it will be, once EVDO Rev B rolls out. Faster than my cable modem, and everywhere too? At that point, I'll be like "WTF do I still have a cable modem and wireless router for?".

But right now, home wifi (cable modem plus wireless router plus airport) is good to have. I can dload an eppy of Battlestar Galactica or Weeds or Scrubs in just a few minutes. With EVDO Rev A, it'd take a couple of hours.

The depressing thing is that 3G appears to be ramping up in speed far faster than home internet service. My home internet speeds, while fast, haven't budged much in the last year or two. But in a year, EVDO will be ten times faster.

Frankly, the US sucks at home broadband. Japan already has 100 Mbps internet to many homes.



Yeah. Though its not like 3G hasn't been around for a couple of years already in the US, though.

.

Well...they slipped 802.11n into the MacBook/MBPro. "n" requires a different radio and dual antenna than required for b/g.


I'm sure you are right but Apple does not always do what everyone thinks they should.


You are right but.....


The only place I hear people so adamant about wireless data speeds is on the internet. I guarantee if I ask people I know with Blackberry's and Treo's what type of data network does their phone use or its speed, they will have no idea.

At this point 3G is not really a big selling point in the US. Where I do agree with you. If people clearly see that the iPhone is noticeably slower and other phones are noticeably faster that could be a negative against it.

I question just what speeds we really do need for a phone.

Considering its much lower resolution, even video's will be fairly small. But, everything gets faster, so it will happen. It could kill WiFi entirely.

But it will never get as fast as a land line.


It's much cheaper to do wireless than it is to do wired. Putting towers up is expensive, but obtaining right of way, and then laying cables is far more expensive. Verison will have spent over $18 billion by 2010 just laying enough FIOS to reach 18 million homes.

Sure, small countries with a few population centers, or very high tax rates will get the highest speeds first. The US is very spread out. What cost S Korea $100 billion to do, will cost at least a couple of trillion here. It will take longer.

Verison has announced that their FIOS will be bring the max speeds from 50 Mbs to 100 Mbs shortly.



Yeah. Though its not like 3G hasn't been around for a couple of years already in the US, though.

.[/QUOTE]

The 802.11n software update doesn't magically make new hardware appear. It only makes 802.11n possible for Macbooks and MBPs that already have the hardware built in. From apple.com:

These Macs have the 802.11n hardware built-in:

* MacBook Pro with Intel Core 2 Duo
* MacBook with Intel Core 2 Duo
* Mac Pro with AirPort Extreme option
* iMac with Intel Core 2 Duo (except the 17-inch, 1.83GHz iMac)

Please make sure you have one of these Mac computers before purchasing the 802.11n Enabler software. It is not compatible with other Mac models.

Thus, a software or firmware update to the iPhone isn't going to magically make 3G radio hardware appear that isn't in there already.

And it doesn't seem to be in there, since Jobs and ATT are talking about bringing out new models of iPhone that will have 3G:

Jobs himself was already pointing towards future models in his keynote speech at Macworld San Francisco. He mentioned in passing that the company's choice of GSM network support via EDGE would allow it to produce a 3G wireless phone and "many other amazing things" in the near future.

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

Also:

3G iPhone could arrive overseas by early 2008

Even though its vanguard cellphone isn't yet out the door, Apple is allegedly preparing a quick follow-up model with 3G wireless installed.

... a Swedish firm has received assurances from its liaison at the provider that the [iPhone] would arrive as soon as September -- and, startlingly, that a version of the handset with 3G (third-generation) wireless Internet access would be in the provider's hands as soon as January of 2008. The contact at the carrier was especially confident, sources said.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...arly_2008.html



See link above. Apparently, even if the initial European release isn't 3G, a follow-up model will appear quickly that is 3G.

.

True. And I'd agree getting up into stupid-fast wireless speeds (EVDO Rev B and up) is more useful for laptops than iPhone-type devices... but who knows what uses they'll eventually find for it.



All very excellent points.

However, regarding speed, keep in mind that 3G (actually, 4G in this case) is slated to become scary-fast... EVDO RevC/UMB is allegedly capable of 280 Mbps!!!

And its only a couple of years away from deployment. Will even fiber to the home be able to keep up? I dunno.

.

Here is what I originally said, "Apple could release the iPhone on June 29th with 3G hardware, and use a firmware update later to activate it."

You said "I don't think they can do that. 3G requires a separate and different radio from GSM/GPRS/EDGE. One that I don't think is in the iPhone."

Then I said "Well...they slipped 802.11n into the MacBook/MBPro. "n" requires a different radio and dual antenna than required for b/g." The point being the radio and antenna were in the laptops but a software update was required to make them useful.

Somehow that bring us to you claiming that software will not magically make non-existent hardware appear.


He said that but Jobs does not always mean what he says and does not always say what he means. Having inert 3G hardware in the phone to be activated later is one way to accomplish what he has said.


So now we can count on some Swedish firm to have definitive info on Apple's future plans?

All wireless is theoretical. At best, it is actually half the speed, and more often, less than one third. When signal isn't great, it's often no better than a fifth.

Land line speeds are close to what the companies state. My DSL is always within 20% of the delivered speed. My home 1 Gbs Ethernet network is within 10% of stated speed.

As backbone speeds continue to rise, FIOS will go even higher. I've seen a couple of studies that show with that multiplexing, FIOS can hit 1 Gbs.

Emmm. It's those Swedish girls, you know. Even Jobs can't resist spilling the plans.

^ Yeah, every man has his carnal weakness.

I'm sorry Teno, but odds are, you're engaging in some wishful thinking here.

If there was a 3G radio in the iPhone, just waiting to be activated by a software update, Apple would've said something by now. 3G helps them sell iPhones, and lack of 3G is one of the big slams against the iPhone, in article after article, editorial after editorial. Apple could take away one of the biggest (perhaps the biggest) reasons NOT to buy an iPhone simply by saying, "Oh yeah... and there's a 3G radio in there. Just give us time to do the software update."

Also, if there's 3G hardware already in the iPhone, why is Jobs careful to point out that future iPhones will have 3G? \

I wanna be with you on this one Teno, I really do, because it would be awesome if it were true, but I just think you're hoping overmuch.

...Oh, and I'm sorry if I lumped you in with the folks who think that the 802.11n software update was all that was required to make 802.11n happen on MacBooks and MBPs. I've heard that from other people, it's wrong, and I'm tired of telling them its wrong. I think my reflex is to 'shoot on sight' on that one right now... my bad.



Again, I really admire your ability to hope.


Sounds higher percentage than thinking the iPhone will be successful in Europe without 3G.

But you're right... those damn, crafty, untrustworthy... Swedes.

In any case, if the Euro iPhone doesn't have 3G at launch, you can bet that a 3G version will be following shortly thereafter. Because that's a market where consumers have had 3G for awhile, and expect it. If Apple drags ass over there on that, they can likely kiss that market good-bye.

.

Even at half-speed, Rev C looks awesome. 140 Mbps would be incredible, you must agree. It's tough to complain about that.


If Verizon can start deploying 1 Gbps FIOS straight to the customer's home by 2009 (when EVDO Rev C/UMB is slated to start deployment), then they are my new and powerful gods.

.

Its not necessarily my wish. My point is that no one knows what Apple is going to do. There are a couple of options Apple has with 3G and at this point its all speculation.

It would be a mistake for people to get it into their heads that Apple will introduce a 3G iPhone at MW '08. When Apple has said no such thing. January '08 comes with no 3G iPhone and people are upset.

Its just as likely what we get on June 29th is what we will have for awhile.


That's difficult to say. Over the past week Apple has steadily announced updated specs and new features for the iPhone. Today in the video they verified that the iPhone will open PDF, Word, and Excel documents. New information is likely to continue through the week. With bigger announcements before Friday.


Oh ok that did confuse me.


I only hear this issue raised on the interweb. Out in real life the only complaint I hear about the iPhone is the price.


Yes the logic of how Apple is doing this is confusing right now. It doesn't make any sense to introduce an iPhone right now without 3G then introduce one with 3G months later. You will piss off the people who bought an iPhone early and could impact scale of economy.

Apple also has no recent precedent of releasing products around the world that have different specs. It wouldn't be smart because that also hurts the scale of economy. If they are using 3G at all they should have in all phones.

I guess where we differ. Is I don't believe the majority of people are going to look at the iPhone and care whether it uses EDGE, GSM, CDMA, EV-DO, WiMAX, or whatever.

Where I can agree. If other phones are noticeably faster searching the internet than the iPhone. That could be a problem.

It sure would be incredible! I don't think we'll see it too soon. They still have problems with gen 1.


I don't know if it will be done by 2009, but I'm willing to bet that it will be in place before 2012. The repeaters are now working. That was a big step. I'm pretty sure that the fiber that Verison is laying can do multifrequency light, and there are other methods of multiplexing without even using that.

The great thing is that once the cable is laid, it costs much less (though it's still expensive) to upgrade the nodes and repeaters. The boxes in the house might have to be changed though, depending on how they handle that part of the drop.

What I would like to know, and I'm sure the numbers are out there, is just what percentage of people both here, Europe, Japan, and the rest of the world, are using 3G in those areas where it is available.

Of course, Apple, the cell manufacturers, and the cell network providers know this.

If we had all of those numbers, if would help us to understand what the situation really is.

The problem is that Apple has already raised such expectations by releasing an iPhone 1.0 that lags behind even most common midrange phones these days in terms of data speeds. Its not unrealistic for consumers to expect the iPhone, which is cutting edge in so many ways, to go to 3G ASAP. Especially considering that the iPhone really encourages Internet usage in every possible way, except data speed. \

Jobs saying that 3G iPhones were in the pipeline is just the icing on the expectations cake.


Frankly, I would be shocked if we were here a year from now, and Apple still hadn't announced or released a 3G iPhone.


Watch and learn Teno. No 'secret 3G' announced though launch week. Launch day getting closer, closer, hoping, hoping.... nah. Drat. Then someone will do an iPhone teardown a couple of weeks later, and there won't be any UMTS/HSDPA radio in there. Sad to say.


Yeah, sorry about that.


Yeah, there are some people out there who are going to buy the iPhone because its hot, or the latest trend, or whatever. Those people are not technically inclined, and don't even really know what 3G is. Put them in the same room as a halfway slick cellular salesman, and the iPhone could be based on 1980s analog technology and they'd still buy it.

People like that guarantee that the iPhone is going to have absolutely no problems selling out at launch.

The problem is, what happens down the road. Can the trendies keep the sales coming six months, a year, two years down the road? We can say that "Well, the iPod is bought partly by trendies, and its still going strong and is moving 10 million units a quarter"... but most of that are relatively cheap Nanos and Shuffles, not $500-600 units (in fact, there isn't an iPod in that price range). Plus the commitment of being in a long-term contract, the cost of service, and the cost of the data plan. Whew.

At these prices, at some point you have to start selling to a more discerning crowd to keep the momentum going. A crowd that actually knows what high-speed data is, and wonders why the heck a $600 iPhone doesn't have it, when $99 phones do. \

And that's just the US. In Europe and Asia, where Apple is less of a household name, where the cellular market is more sophisticated and 3G has been around longer, Apple runs into that crowd a whole lot sooner.


The most logical theory I've heard revolves around power management and battery life.

3G sucks more juice than EDGE, you already have a very large screen sucking lots of power, and Apple perhaps was initially unsure that they'd be able to get battery life to the point where the iPhone was viable with 3G. This was made extra critical by their design choice to have the battery be non-removable.

Also, ATT's 3G coverage is still pretty poor, and Apple could err on the side of "well, the customers are not missing much yet" with no 3G (though of course ATT's 3G coverage will be much better in a year or so). Plus, they could use WiFi as a cover, and have, to some effect.

However, final iPhone battery life specs appeared just this week, and it looks like any power management issues have been resolved... battery life now looks great. So now the road is clear to do a 3G version.

No doubt they want to, for Europe and Asia. And then they'd likely want to circle back and release it in the US, for the holdouts/more discerning customers. And to head off any high-end phone competitors that will be appearing, no doubt touting their inclusion of 3G as a selling point over the iPhone.

After all, speed is a very easy thing to sell on:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cicguTDA6wE



I think they will have it in all phones, it'll just take a bit of time. See above.

.

Basically, 3G is popular in Asia (specifically, 'richer Asia', i.e. Japan and Korea), and is ramping up fairly rapidly from a low base in the US and Europe, with Europe quite a bit further along:

According to industry reports, there are currently 151 3G license holders operating in 56 countries and 207 3G-networks globally, serving a total of 200 million 3G users worldwide.

In Asia, 3G subscribers have reached a market share of 38% while 62% of the total mobile subscribers are 3G enabled in Japan and Korea, respectively.

http://www.quicklybored.com/content/?p=1160

Some graphics:







In the US, 3G still has a-ways to go (we are way behind Japan and Korea in 3G penetration), but guess what'll drive demand for it? Yep, mobile 'internet rich' devices like... the iPhone.

.

Which is why Apple may not worry about 3G in the near term.


I'm not saying Apple will do this. Honestly I'm not emotionally invested in 3G.

My two basic points are that Apple has a couple of options and this is one they could do. The other is the fact that no one knows what Apple will do. Many try to predict, but at best its a shot in the dark.


People constantly accuse Apple hardware of being over priced and under featured. But that criticism has never forced them do anything any quicker or any different from what they've decided to do. I don't believe it'll be any different with the iPhone.


If this is the theory. The battery issues have been resolved, then there is no reason we cannot have 3G now. Which leaves me to believe the battery wasn't the problem.

Sry, double post.

.