At this point I would be surprised to see iPhones with different form factors. Simply because the current models are still in short supply - and the White iPhone 4 is apparently still not ready for market.
if the history of Apple is any indication - there will not be any chance of the iPhone on another carrier or other form factors at least until the demand for the current models drops and the supply chain is full. In other words - until the profit from the existing model run is maximized and or the consumer demand for the current model passes a peak.
Regardless of how much more potential market is untapped due to lack of form factor options - or any burden it might place on developers - we will not see larger or smaller iPhones until the bean counters deem it is necessary to maintain the profit margin the board of directors expects to see.
we will not see larger or smaller iPhones until the bean counters deem it is necessary to maintain the profit margin the board of directors expects to see.
I agree.
There's no real indication that there is much profitability to be had in either more capable or less capable devices. Until there is, we will not see a second device.
1) Because last year's model already has last years software written for it. Supporting it has zero cost.
2) Because a smaller screen means that apps / websites and everything else is less legible. Has to be recoded.
3) Saving a hundred dollars off the retail price is a poor deal for consumers when this is dwarfed by the cost of the data plan.
4) If consumers want a smaller device with less functionality, then then can already turn to a million and one other handset - none of which make a profit.
C.
1) Apparently new software is never written. I'm not seeing much additional work in supporting a platform using the same internals as the larger phone.
2) It's your opinion that things wouldn't be legible and would require recoding. I don't think the iPhone represents the lower edge of legibility.
3) I agree it's a bad deal, but people still buy the 8 GB 3GS.
Why would you want to make an iPhone nano? You want an iPhone nano, buy a Nokia phone! These so called researchers have nothing else to talk about.
Hell, by that logic Apple would have never created the iPod in the first place becase you could already get portable music players from other places.
Quote:
Originally Posted by esummers
They are talking about it because Apple would dominate the Market. Better UI, industrial design, visual voicemail, face book, and iTunes support would blow other feature phones out of the water.
Spot on! Nearly every phone out there, even the non-smart phones, have the ability to sync contacts and calendar events with your computer and can play music. But I'd wager that less than 10% of non-smart phones are ever synced to a computer. Either because the carrier doesn't allow it or because you need to buy extra software or because it's just too damn complicated.
This is something where Apple's expertise could really improve things. Every iPod that has had a screen, except perhaps the very first one and the newest nano have the ability to display contact and calendar information. All you need is a phone able to sync to iTunes and you could include that information on even a "dumb" phone.
Take the new nano (putting the contacts and calendar function back on it!) and turn it into a flip phone with the same screen and I think you have a winner. Remember, dumb phones still far outsell smart phones. And an Apple iPhone nano would be come the gateway drug to get people into the Apple camp to later upgrade to a full-fledged iPhone.
Good move Apple. With people around the country dropping calls due to weak AT&T coverage and the absurd external antenna design, I'm sure different size iPhones are just what the world is clamoring for.
If I may make a suggestion, why not open the phone up to multiple carriers instead of multiple sizes. I do believe there is some clamor for that. And put the antenna back on the inside please.
Yes Apple, do everything the opposite of what has made this product a phenomenal success.
With music players, a small, simplified device made sense. With an internet-connected, app-running phone, it makes no sense at all.
C.
Who said it would be internet connected and app-running? Not having a screen to display playlists and make selections didn't stop Apple from creating the shuffle?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xero910
There's no reason for an iPhone nano. They aren't going to sell an iPhone for less than $100. Keep dreaming.
Why are people so closed minded and limited to seeing value only in their own needs? As I stated in an early post, "dumb" phones still far, far outsell smart phones. Don't you think Apple might want a slice of that pie?
And besides, as more and more people get iPads (and perhaps the rumored 7" iPad), will they all also want an full-capability iPhone? Personally, I have no interest in having to carry around something as big as an iPhone all of the time. I laugh every time my friends have to take their iPhones out of their pockets and set them on the bar when we go out because they can't sit down with them in their pockets. Even funnier when someone then spills a beer on one.
I would love to have a small phone with a better UI and better syncing (music, contacts, calendar) than is currently available in non-smart phones. And then have the option of taking a full-fledged data device (touch, iPad, etc) only when I need/want to carry it. If you have an iPhone, you have no choice but to carry it with you, even if all you need is your phone.
Who said it would be internet connected and app-running? Not having a screen to display playlists and make selections didn't stop Apple from creating the shuffle?
Why are people so closed minded and limited to seeing value only in their own needs? As I stated in an early post, "dumb" phones still far, far outsell smart phones. Don't you think Apple might want a slice of that pie?
And besides, as more and more people get iPads (and perhaps the rumored 7" iPad), will they all also want an full-capability iPhone? Personally, I have no interest in having to carry around something as big as an iPhone all of the time. I laugh every time my friends have to take their iPhones out of their pockets and set them on the bar when we go out because they can't sit down with them in their pockets. Even funnier when someone then spills a beer on one.
I would love to have a small phone with a better UI and better syncing (music, contacts, calendar) than is currently available in non-smart phones. And then have the option of taking a full-fledged data device (touch, iPad, etc) only when I need/want to carry it. If you have an iPhone, you have no choice but to carry it with you, even if all you need is your phone.
Your more open mind and less limited vision bring into view the Kin.
Do you have evidence that Android development is slowing because of the factors you identify?
My point was that the ecosystem is booming despite the factors you identify. I see nothing that supports the contention that these things are "really starting to hurt Android".
Got any evidence that your struggles are hurting their platform?
Man, these clueless fandroid drones are tiring. I am a developer of both Android and iPhone applications. I have personal experience Android development is horrible due to the fragmentation.
Ever google this? Do not see what i need to. But, quickly...check these bullet points and references:
Without better evidence, anybody's guess is equally good. But honestly, I think that argument sounds a lot like chicken little saying that the sky is falling.
tell us from your vast development experience, since you obviously do Android development, how do you go about testing your application? What emulators are you using? Do you own all the various models on all the carriers(since they do different mods to the core Android) to test on?
I am eagerly awaiting your response because this would greatly simplify our development for android.
you get a much better movie experience, better web browsing, no fragmentation as you crop apps, more room for typing in portrait mode. No downsides to it at all really and the phone is exactly the same size.
I don't get the iPhone Nano thing. I haven't heard any people complain that the iPhone is too big. If it was cheaper, that would be a big improvement but I doubt making it smaller would have much of an impact on price.
I don't know about most people but anything larger then the iphone is just to damn big. My brother has a droid phone, I don't recall which one, but the thing is monstrous to hold and just silly to try and put it into a pocket.
But that droid can't be as wide and thick as my wallet and somehow I manage to carry that around in my pocket every day.
My problems with the current iPod/iPhone/iPad lineup are:
1. The 3.5" screen is too small for my middle aged eyes. 326dpi isn't much of an improvement if text is physically too small to read.
2. I love the inexpensive no-contract data plans for the iPad, but the device is way too big to carry around everywhere.
3. The iPod touch doesn't have 3G as an option like the iPad does.
4. iPhone contracts are too expensive.
So size really is the big issue here. I'd like to see the iPod touch scaled up to a 6" screen and 3G data added. Simply scaling down the iPad would not work because a 4:3 ratio device would be too wide.
Like most people, developers want the best returns for a given investment in time. The consensus was that iOS returned around 5 times more than the other platforms.
C.
I'll add your anecdote to the pile of conflicting facts spattering the media, like this:
"Andy Rubin, Google's Vice President of engineering -- Android development head honcho and the man behind both Android and Danger -- was quoted in the press release announcing the T-Mobile G2 that the Android Market now has over 80,000 applications -- up 10,000 from the last we heard on July 15."
Let's see, an 800% increase in 60 days? If we annualize that...
You get the point. The facts don't support the contention "Different screen resolutions, processor speeds, and memory sizes" are "starting to really hurt Android"?
Android is pretty much the opposite of really hurting.
I would love a 4" iPhone even if the pixel density was less. I think a lot of people over 35 like me with less than perfect eye sight would thank apple for a larger screen especially since I you can only reflow text when double tapping and not pinch zooming.
I would expect Apple has had a slew of different device sizes since long before the iPhone and iPad. I have to think that their settling on 3.5? 3:2 for the iPhone and 9.7? 4:3 for the iPad wasn?t just board room pow wow, but actual mockups with base setups to see which would be the best overall option. I have to think they would still consider to do that.
As for this coming out as a real product, not unless they have a new UI and SDK for the App Store to go along with it, just like all iDevices running iOS.
I'll add your anecdote to the pile of conflicting facts spattering the media, like this:
"Andy Rubin, Google's Vice President of engineering -- Android development head honcho and the man behind both Android and Danger -- was quoted in the press release announcing the T-Mobile G2 that the Android Market now has over 80,000 applications -- up 10,000 from the last we heard on July 15."
Let's see, an 800% increase in 60 days? If we annualize that...
You get the point. The facts don't support the contention "Different screen resolutions, processor speeds, and memory sizes" are "starting to really hurt Android"?
Android is pretty much the opposite of really hurting.
800%. Lol. That would be 14% and 60k a year. No great shakes. Evidence of a slowing down.
Change my statement to "The dominance of the Android operating system gains unabated by any horrors it causes to lazy developers. There are zillions of other developers who are, at an explosive rate, developing for Android".
Comments
if the history of Apple is any indication - there will not be any chance of the iPhone on another carrier or other form factors at least until the demand for the current models drops and the supply chain is full. In other words - until the profit from the existing model run is maximized and or the consumer demand for the current model passes a peak.
Regardless of how much more potential market is untapped due to lack of form factor options - or any burden it might place on developers - we will not see larger or smaller iPhones until the bean counters deem it is necessary to maintain the profit margin the board of directors expects to see.
we will not see larger or smaller iPhones until the bean counters deem it is necessary to maintain the profit margin the board of directors expects to see.
I agree.
There's no real indication that there is much profitability to be had in either more capable or less capable devices. Until there is, we will not see a second device.
(other than the hand-me-down last-season model)
C.
No.
1) Because last year's model already has last years software written for it. Supporting it has zero cost.
2) Because a smaller screen means that apps / websites and everything else is less legible. Has to be recoded.
3) Saving a hundred dollars off the retail price is a poor deal for consumers when this is dwarfed by the cost of the data plan.
4) If consumers want a smaller device with less functionality, then then can already turn to a million and one other handset - none of which make a profit.
C.
1) Apparently new software is never written. I'm not seeing much additional work in supporting a platform using the same internals as the larger phone.
2) It's your opinion that things wouldn't be legible and would require recoding. I don't think the iPhone represents the lower edge of legibility.
3) I agree it's a bad deal, but people still buy the 8 GB 3GS.
4) Less functionality?
You didn't even read my entire post.
Why would you want to make an iPhone nano? You want an iPhone nano, buy a Nokia phone! These so called researchers have nothing else to talk about.
Hell, by that logic Apple would have never created the iPod in the first place becase you could already get portable music players from other places.
They are talking about it because Apple would dominate the Market. Better UI, industrial design, visual voicemail, face book, and iTunes support would blow other feature phones out of the water.
Spot on! Nearly every phone out there, even the non-smart phones, have the ability to sync contacts and calendar events with your computer and can play music. But I'd wager that less than 10% of non-smart phones are ever synced to a computer. Either because the carrier doesn't allow it or because you need to buy extra software or because it's just too damn complicated.
This is something where Apple's expertise could really improve things. Every iPod that has had a screen, except perhaps the very first one and the newest nano have the ability to display contact and calendar information. All you need is a phone able to sync to iTunes and you could include that information on even a "dumb" phone.
Take the new nano (putting the contacts and calendar function back on it!) and turn it into a flip phone with the same screen and I think you have a winner. Remember, dumb phones still far outsell smart phones. And an Apple iPhone nano would be come the gateway drug to get people into the Apple camp to later upgrade to a full-fledged iPhone.
Good move Apple. With people around the country dropping calls due to weak AT&T coverage and the absurd external antenna design, I'm sure different size iPhones are just what the world is clamoring for.
If I may make a suggestion, why not open the phone up to multiple carriers instead of multiple sizes. I do believe there is some clamor for that. And put the antenna back on the inside please.
Yes Apple, do everything the opposite of what has made this product a phenomenal success.
Nah.
With music players, a small, simplified device made sense. With an internet-connected, app-running phone, it makes no sense at all.
C.
Who said it would be internet connected and app-running? Not having a screen to display playlists and make selections didn't stop Apple from creating the shuffle?
There's no reason for an iPhone nano. They aren't going to sell an iPhone for less than $100. Keep dreaming.
Why are people so closed minded and limited to seeing value only in their own needs? As I stated in an early post, "dumb" phones still far, far outsell smart phones. Don't you think Apple might want a slice of that pie?
And besides, as more and more people get iPads (and perhaps the rumored 7" iPad), will they all also want an full-capability iPhone? Personally, I have no interest in having to carry around something as big as an iPhone all of the time. I laugh every time my friends have to take their iPhones out of their pockets and set them on the bar when we go out because they can't sit down with them in their pockets. Even funnier when someone then spills a beer on one.
I would love to have a small phone with a better UI and better syncing (music, contacts, calendar) than is currently available in non-smart phones. And then have the option of taking a full-fledged data device (touch, iPad, etc) only when I need/want to carry it. If you have an iPhone, you have no choice but to carry it with you, even if all you need is your phone.
As I stated in an early post, "dumb" phones still far, far outsell smart phones. Don't you think Apple might want a slice of that pie?
It isn't a pie. It's a crumb. A crumb at the bottom of a rusty old pie dish.
C.
Who said it would be internet connected and app-running? Not having a screen to display playlists and make selections didn't stop Apple from creating the shuffle?
Why are people so closed minded and limited to seeing value only in their own needs? As I stated in an early post, "dumb" phones still far, far outsell smart phones. Don't you think Apple might want a slice of that pie?
And besides, as more and more people get iPads (and perhaps the rumored 7" iPad), will they all also want an full-capability iPhone? Personally, I have no interest in having to carry around something as big as an iPhone all of the time. I laugh every time my friends have to take their iPhones out of their pockets and set them on the bar when we go out because they can't sit down with them in their pockets. Even funnier when someone then spills a beer on one.
I would love to have a small phone with a better UI and better syncing (music, contacts, calendar) than is currently available in non-smart phones. And then have the option of taking a full-fledged data device (touch, iPad, etc) only when I need/want to carry it. If you have an iPhone, you have no choice but to carry it with you, even if all you need is your phone.
Your more open mind and less limited vision bring into view the Kin.
Do you have evidence that Android development is slowing because of the factors you identify?
My point was that the ecosystem is booming despite the factors you identify. I see nothing that supports the contention that these things are "really starting to hurt Android".
Got any evidence that your struggles are hurting their platform?
Man, these clueless fandroid drones are tiring. I am a developer of both Android and iPhone applications. I have personal experience Android development is horrible due to the fragmentation.
Ever google this? Do not see what i need to. But, quickly...check these bullet points and references:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android...on_development
Without better evidence, anybody's guess is equally good. But honestly, I think that argument sounds a lot like chicken little saying that the sky is falling.
tell us from your vast development experience, since you obviously do Android development, how do you go about testing your application? What emulators are you using? Do you own all the various models on all the carriers(since they do different mods to the core Android) to test on?
I am eagerly awaiting your response because this would greatly simplify our development for android.
As I stated in an early post, "dumb" phones still far, far outsell smart phones. Don't you think Apple might want a slice of that pie?
Why on earth would Apple want to dilute its margins making and selling a yesterday's tech product into a profitless market that's already saturated?
Larger iPhone, you say??? Hahaha!!!
Not necessarily larger phone. If the iPhone had a widescreen like in the mockup here:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=112805
you get a much better movie experience, better web browsing, no fragmentation as you crop apps, more room for typing in portrait mode. No downsides to it at all really and the phone is exactly the same size.
I don't get the iPhone Nano thing. I haven't heard any people complain that the iPhone is too big. If it was cheaper, that would be a big improvement but I doubt making it smaller would have much of an impact on price.
I don't know about most people but anything larger then the iphone is just to damn big. My brother has a droid phone, I don't recall which one, but the thing is monstrous to hold and just silly to try and put it into a pocket.
But that droid can't be as wide and thick as my wallet and somehow I manage to carry that around in my pocket every day.
My problems with the current iPod/iPhone/iPad lineup are:
1. The 3.5" screen is too small for my middle aged eyes. 326dpi isn't much of an improvement if text is physically too small to read.
2. I love the inexpensive no-contract data plans for the iPad, but the device is way too big to carry around everywhere.
3. The iPod touch doesn't have 3G as an option like the iPad does.
4. iPhone contracts are too expensive.
So size really is the big issue here. I'd like to see the iPod touch scaled up to a 6" screen and 3G data added. Simply scaling down the iPad would not work because a 4:3 ratio device would be too wide.
I recently went to a mobile developer conference.
Like most people, developers want the best returns for a given investment in time. The consensus was that iOS returned around 5 times more than the other platforms.
C.
I'll add your anecdote to the pile of conflicting facts spattering the media, like this:
"Andy Rubin, Google's Vice President of engineering -- Android development head honcho and the man behind both Android and Danger -- was quoted in the press release announcing the T-Mobile G2 that the Android Market now has over 80,000 applications -- up 10,000 from the last we heard on July 15."
http://www.androidcentral.com/google...android-market
Let's see, an 800% increase in 60 days? If we annualize that...
You get the point. The facts don't support the contention "Different screen resolutions, processor speeds, and memory sizes" are "starting to really hurt Android"?
Android is pretty much the opposite of really hurting.
I have personal experience Android development is horrible due to the fragmentation.
Your horrors are likely real. But they are beside the point.
The point was "Different screen resolutions, processor speeds, and memory sizes" are "starting to really hurt Android".
I see no evidence of any such hurt, caused by the reasons cited, or otherwise.
Android is pretty much the opposite of really hurting.
Android is not a company - or an entity.
C.
Ugh, here we go again. Not gonna happen, folks.
I would expect Apple has had a slew of different device sizes since long before the iPhone and iPad. I have to think that their settling on 3.5? 3:2 for the iPhone and 9.7? 4:3 for the iPad wasn?t just board room pow wow, but actual mockups with base setups to see which would be the best overall option. I have to think they would still consider to do that.
As for this coming out as a real product, not unless they have a new UI and SDK for the App Store to go along with it, just like all iDevices running iOS.
I'll add your anecdote to the pile of conflicting facts spattering the media, like this:
"Andy Rubin, Google's Vice President of engineering -- Android development head honcho and the man behind both Android and Danger -- was quoted in the press release announcing the T-Mobile G2 that the Android Market now has over 80,000 applications -- up 10,000 from the last we heard on July 15."
http://www.androidcentral.com/google...android-market
Let's see, an 800% increase in 60 days? If we annualize that...
You get the point. The facts don't support the contention "Different screen resolutions, processor speeds, and memory sizes" are "starting to really hurt Android"?
Android is pretty much the opposite of really hurting.
800%. Lol. That would be 14% and 60k a year. No great shakes. Evidence of a slowing down.
Android is not a company - or an entity.
C.
Weak.
Change my statement to "The dominance of the Android operating system gains unabated by any horrors it causes to lazy developers. There are zillions of other developers who are, at an explosive rate, developing for Android".
Let's not mince words.