Apple MUST create a PDA-iPod-Phone device to survive.

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 63
    kotatsukotatsu Posts: 1,010member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by makeroom4bubba



    Right now most anyone has a cell phone in their pocket. Socially it's considered the norm. People are shocked when they find out someone doesn't have a cell phone.




    I don't own a cell phone. Never have.



    Why? Because I'm never far from a land line, so why waste my money on something I have no need for?



    Also, I live in the UK, so I can only speak from my own experience here - the culture of cell phones has developed to such an extent, that it is repellent to more and more people. They're no longer high-tech chic or cool, they're just annoyances and dumbed down to the very lowest level. Sounds elitist perhaps but at the present time a ring tone is number one in the UK music charts. And to say this particular ring tone is annoying would be a truly great understatement.



    Perhaps because of this I would prefer Apple not tarnish their well earned reputation by entering the cell market. It's already packed anyway, and with companies which already know how to give their customers exactly what they want - such as brain dead ring tones.



    Apple should keep to the higher ground, the classier end of the market. I really do believe that when a company chases sales no matter what, they ultimately cheapen their image and dumb down their products to the lowest common denominator, and in the process alienate their original supporters.
  • Reply 42 of 63
    tenchi71tenchi71 Posts: 5member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matsu

    My cell phone cost me $29. Can Apple sell an iTunes phone for $29?



    Considering that I have to pay monthly for my phone, I'm not that impressed with getting the phone for $29 either, it should have been free. Can Apple offer a free iTunes phone?



    Can they make both a phone and deals with providers so that they can give me a free phone?




    My phone cost me $300. Why?? Not becuase I wanted the hottest thing out there, but becuase I didn't want to be strapped down to another 2 year contract with my cell provider. If I could, I would have paid $500 ($300 phone + 200 Mini) for a Tri-band GSM phone with the ability to play my iTMS bought music, and with the capacity of a Mini. This way I have a music playing phone AND I'm not strapped into a contract. I know quite a few people who agree with me. One less thing to carry.



    What the cell phone company's have is a racket. I can't wait for the day where we can just walk into a store and buy a fully capable phone with out having to sign for a multi year contract. This subsidizing that they do kills consumer choice.



    And Apple does need to keep a carefull eye at what the cell phone companies are doing. As phones with hard-drives start arriving, they will tread into iPod territory. If i had the option of a phone that can hold 4GB of music/data when I bought my Mini, I wouldn't have bought a Mini. I don't care how cool my green Mini is....
  • Reply 43 of 63
    nofeernofeer Posts: 2,422member
    to the above i agree maybe apple has the market stance to sell a smartphone separate from the carriers and you take to carrier to have it programmed--i'd love that. but carriers like to have exclusive access to certain phones, just like sports stores want the newest nikes, it's a synergistic relationship to maximaize profit on phones so they don't become commodities like computers



    also, when will itunes get into the gravy of ringtones???



    i'm a bit late but

    BT must be stereo the rest of the above i agree with, will it have palm os??? or a mac os?? what about the windows world?? alot of ipod success was ipod/itunes for windows. how does apple appeal to the windows world???



    and profit margin-----

    apple makes more from ipod than working with ANY manufacturer.

    if ipod is to evolve to smart phone, how does apple maintain profit margin, and growth

    do you think ipod phone growth will match ipod???

    so basically if ipod evolves to phone, then apple makes less money????

    what is the business model for an iphone/smartphone to carry apple to HIGHER revenues and profits. do they have a license agreement for itunes, is itunes on a phone that much better than any other mp3 phone player???
  • Reply 44 of 63
    lungarettalungaretta Posts: 194member
    I'm skeptical that they will do this anytime soon but one thing that caught my eye while looking at the WWDC sessions was:



    627 - Mobile Development with Xcode for J2ME Devices

    "Java applications for mobile devices represent one of the fastest-growing application segments today. Developers on Mac OS X have a choice of MIDP (Mobile Information Device Profile) SDKs and tools. This session will cover the entire process of developing and testing MIDP 1.0 and MIDP 2.0 midlets on Mac OS X, and then deploying them to embedded J2ME JVMs."

    ( http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/descriptions/ )



    As a developer of J2ME games and having OSX as my platform of choice, I know all too well that I have a VERY limited choice of development tools available to me on OSX. Clearly Apple ARE going to be up to something in that area and it's tantilising to guess what that may be.



    Another thing to mention while I'm here is my theory that skype/ichat integration would be great but greater still would be to bundle the wifi chipset into an ipod. While within your own wifi network or out and about in coffee shops et al, free calls to all your contacts - just pick up your ipod and your set. Because your contacts are predefined, there'd be no requirement for a keypad - just find them in the address book and call.



    Of course with a wifi enabled ipod, all of a sudden a large hard disk would be redundant and it could just stream music from your desktop as well as the entire itunes music store suddenly being available ON the ipod as well. Have to say battery life would be crap though...



    Edit: Actually now I come to think about it, the inclusion of J2ME in Xcode smells very much like they may put a jvm in the ipod and let 3rd party developers make java apps that run on them. This will be a boon for the ipod, a new revenue source for developers and all run safely within the java sandbox so there'll be no security compromise wrt DRM etc.



    I may be drifting off topic though...

  • Reply 45 of 63
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    For people who want music, any iPod is not an untowards burden, especially not the mini and shuffle. I think that the mini is the best portable music player on the market bar none. There are a great many more synergistic features that iPods can acquire before we get into the territory of thinking about telephony. How about radio? Useful, or BT sync, maybe as a form of exchanging wireless info, or downloading iTunes, "through" a compatible phone. How about a microphone? iPod would be very useful for voice notation.



    These are all more in line with iPod's intended use, and would be much more reliable than trying to merge it with a phone.



    Phones make good phones, they don't even make particularly good PDA's, RIM being the exception, and only for email junkies.



    As for fronting the cost of the phone. That's just dumb. Get a contract, get a phone. What good is the phone when you still have to pay a monthly fee for a contract? Just for the freedom? Look at the total cash outlay, might as well get a package, your $300 phone won't be worth $25 after two years. This is like paying for a contact twice.
  • Reply 46 of 63
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matsu

    For people who want music, any iPod is not an untowards burden, especially not the mini and shuffle. I think that the mini is the best portable music player on the market bar none.



    I bought my mini when the 2G models were released. I totally agree with you, the mini IS the best music player, but there have been many many occasions where I did find it a burden. Like I said before, one less thing to carry, at least for me, would be nice.



    Quote:

    Phones make good phones, they don't even make particularly good PDA's, RIM being the exception, and only for email junkies.



    Very true. But once the phone manufactures start releaseing phones with hard drives (which is really really soon), they will be competing with Apple for music player sales and, through their cell networks, music sales. That's why I believe that Apple should be involved, some way or some how. Competition won't come from Yahoo!, Napster, or Creative Labs, but from Verizon, Cingular, and T-Mobile. They can give you the whole package. Like iPod and iTMS does right now, with the added bonus of giving you a music store that's in your pocket at all times.



    Quote:

    As for fronting the cost of the phone. That's just dumb. Get a contract, get a phone. What good is the phone when you still have to pay a monthly fee for a contract? Just for the freedom? Look at the total cash outlay, might as well get a package, your $300 phone won't be worth $25 after two years. This is like paying for a contact twice.



    And how much will my mini be worth after 2 years?



    Yes, I fronted the cost of the phone, but I can now go to any wireless carrier thoughout the world who is on a GSM network, pop in a new SIM card and go. Paying for a locked phone up front is dumb. Now I have a phone that works on any GSM network in the world, no contract to rip, no $150-$250 contract termination fee. If I'm not happy with my cell carrier, I just go to the next one. If their customer service starts to become a pile stinking junk, I dont have to wait 2 years to terminate my contract only to get into another 2 year contract because I need a phone that works on their network. I just cancel. Done. On to the next one. That kind of freedom I am willing to pay up front for.

    Though I must admit the consolidation of cell carriers of late is making the choices narrower.
  • Reply 47 of 63
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Your mini will still play music perfectly after two years. It's monetary worth at that point is irrelevant. I should have explained myself better. Cell phones are essentially disposable. Packages are alwys in flux, they have a high failure rate, and technology tends to become obsoleted.



    I still don't see why you buy a GSM phone as opposed to picking up a package with a GSM carrier. You get the phone free, or at a negligible sot, and if you don't like the service you just stop using the phone, why cancel it? Remember, you're talking about fronting 300-500 AND THEN paying monthly on top of that. That's unneccessary.



    If you travel, you just buy a pay as you go type kit for the area you're going to, swap chips and use your phone as per usual. You're still paying less than some schizophrenic package hopping.
  • Reply 48 of 63
    cubistcubist Posts: 954member
    It's the 2-year contract and early termination fees that are the real ripoff. I haven't used my Cingular phone for months, and won't for the next month either, but I have to keep paying for it because of the JERKS at Cingular who insist on commitments and the COMPLETE TOTAL FOOLS at the FCC who let the US cellular carriers get away with this crap.



    <rant>If I was appointed FCC commissioner my first act would be to outlaw any contract term longer than one month for consumer telephone service of any kind. Then we would see prices of phones and services change to where they should properly be. The FCC is supposed to be acting on behalf of the public, but they have abdicated that responsibility. They should be a Rottweiler constantly tearing at the throats of the greedy RBOC monopolies, but they are pampered poodles instead.</rant>
  • Reply 49 of 63
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    If people want to bind themselves on contracts lasting two years to get a new phone, why make it illegal? You can always get another plan if you don´t wish to sign a long term contract.
  • Reply 50 of 63
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    I still haven't read any argument for fronting the cost of the phone. It costs more that way. No matter what you pay for the phone, and you're talking $300-500, you will still have to pay a monthly in order to use the phone, and there is no discount on the monthly rate simply because you bring your own phone. YOu may cancel any time? Big deal, in buying the phone, you've paid and equivalent of 12-18 months of service already.



    You DO NOT need to cancel a package to get yorself out of it. Just stop using the phone, put it in a closet, and get a new phone, the ultimate price will be the same. Also, read your contracts. Never cancel a phone. Once you've used a phone for (3-6 months) you can either choose other available packages or suspend the phone. Most carriers offer a 15-19.99 plan, downgrade to that, and then ride out the contract, cheaper than cancellation, or suspend the phone -- this option usually costs $9.99/month -- cheaper still!



    But again, even simply throwing the phone in closet at worst no more expensive than fronting the cost.



    Rules may be different in your area...
  • Reply 51 of 63
    cubistcubist Posts: 954member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matsu

    I still haven't read any argument for fronting the cost of the phone. It costs more that way. No matter what you pay for the phone, and you're talking $300-500, ...



    But that's only a horrendous ripoff because few people take it. I doubt the carriers pay more than $100 for most of the phones. Believe me, they're not doing you any favors. Paying $20 for an inactive phone? That is a complete, total rip-off.
  • Reply 52 of 63
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    I don't think you're understanding me. You fail to account for the cost of the initial outlay.



    Your scenario:



    $300 for phone, $20-50 per month for service



    2 years = 300+480 to 300+1200 or 780 - 1500 over two years, depending on package.



    My scenario



    $0 for phone, plus $20-50 per month for service



    2 years = 480 to 1200



    If, rather than cancel, I downgrade or suspend, that cost only falls... I have to factor in a new package, but what am I paying for that. So, if in year two, I downgrade or suspend, and pick up another package (new phone), my cost might look like this: $10-20 plus the $50, so 60-70 per month for that year, or 720-840 for year two. Assuming a $50 phone package, that means:



    over two years 600 (year 1) + 720 (year 2) or 1320 for two years of service.



    Still cheaper than fronting the cost of the phone!



    And that's assuming that I'm so schizo about my phones, that I feel some irrational need to change them every year.
  • Reply 53 of 63
    cubistcubist Posts: 954member
    But Matsu, your cost of the initial outlay is wrong. That phone that Verizon "gives" you is not a $300 phone. It's a piece of junk they paid no more than $50 to $100 for. This story that the carriers are doing this to cover the cost of the phone is a myth. A lie. It may have been true 20 years ago, but it's not true today.



    Go to Cingular.com and they will charge you $500 for a Razr - the same price you'd pay for an unlocked phone. In a truly free market, you'd pay a lot less.



    So take the cost of the phone out of your equations. Now also, consider that I wanted to quit Cingular 3 months ago, but I have to pay $25/month for a dead phone. That's $75 I wouldn't have to pay in a free market.



    US consumers are getting ripped off badly. There's no justification for it. Stop making excuses for it. Or are you a shill for the cell carriers?
  • Reply 54 of 63
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Hey, I'm wit you, give me the cheapest possible solution. However, I'm unclear as to whether you're talking about the market that exists, or the one which you'd like to see exist. Under the market that exists today, my way is cheaper.



    The phones, yep, they cost $25 to make, but can you buy one anywhere at that price?
  • Reply 55 of 63
    Quote:

    Originally posted by cubist

    Now also, consider that I wanted to quit Cingular 3 months ago, but I have to pay $25/month for a dead phone. That's $75 I wouldn't have to pay in a free market.



    Plus I don't believe you can port Cingular number over to Verizon if the account is still active, whether you're using it or not.



    What sucks about the current market is that the consumer, in reality, has zero choice. It is completely governed by the cell companies. That's why I would love to see someone come right out and market phones directly to the consumer, not the cell carriers. Let me buy the service from the wireless telcos, and let me buy my phone directly from Moto or Nokia. If I so choose.



    Why should I get into a LONG TERM 2 year contract for phone service and a cheap phone that probably won't last 2 years. I didn't have to with my land line, I didn't have to with my cable TV. And then throw my phone in the closet and continue to pay on it if I become unhappy with the service to go out and get shckled once again. Like I said before, that's the price I'm willing to pay, up front, for the freedom. I broke the shackles, it cost me money. Why should it be so difficult? Why does it have to be such a rip off?
  • Reply 56 of 63
    macchinemacchine Posts: 295member
    Jobs said he did not want to enter the market for phones because the current phones are TOO GOOD.



    Well, what about building a phone like this -- IT BLOWS ALL CURRENT PHONES AWAY !!!





    Use the new voice recognition tech that detects muscle movements in the neck, you don't have to speak out loud, you can whisper but it knows what you are saying by detecting muscle movements.



    Then the phone would match your words with what you have said in previous conversation and use recordings from those conversations to say the words for you, you here yourself speaking in the ear mike. This phone would require training which would involve simply using it as a conventional phone for a while.



    Voice recognition is used to record what the other person on the line is saying. You later receive an email of the entire conversation as text.



    The bottom line is...



    You speak in whispers when in public or any time you want and the phone always sends you and the caller an email record of the conversation, that is if their email address is in their profile.



    There is a delay in sending the eMail of course that way you hit the privacy button if you want, then the eMail is only saved locally on the phone, thus keeping the conversation totally private.



  • Reply 57 of 63
    nofeernofeer Posts: 2,422member
    i think you are missing the point

    forget contracts and phone costs from carriers

    if apple gets into phones because they will replace the ipod then where is the $$$$$ for apple's bottom line??? what model will work for apple ipods or phones??? phones are near commodities.

    jobs is very very smart, he is not going to exchange profits of ipods for phones. how would it work to keep apple very green???

    what we should discuss is the business model for APPLE and phones to make money--that's the ball game

    show me the money
  • Reply 58 of 63
    cubistcubist Posts: 954member
    Nofeer's right. They should skip the cellular crap completely and go directly to a WiFi/WiMax VOIP phone.
  • Reply 59 of 63
    macchinemacchine Posts: 295member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by cubist

    Nofeer's right. They should skip the cellular crap completely and go directly to a WiFi/WiMax VOIP phone.



    So In/Noki are supposed to be starting to ship their WiMax network hardware just recently.



    Will Apple run and hide or is their some way they can get into this ???



    Although there are plenty of WiFi networks, most are slow for roaming, a chat phone that works like a cell phone, especially my design, would be nice...



    ... but the money is in how it well it sells the network...





    ... is Apple and IBM or maybe Disney going to create a WiMax media network ???



    Ya, I could see Apple, Pixar, Disney, and maybe even Sony and IBM in a few years creating a media network that includes web, software/media sales, and Cable TV.



    But an interactive kid and educational TV network is where the money is and where Apple and Pixar get involved.



    Interactive TV has been big in South America for a long time.



    If there was gaming network that provided BIG online tournaments for gamers, computer gaming would become a sport like any other, and that would be HUGE MONEY.



    But could you do this with a proprietary wireless WiMax network, only if it was quickly built to be ubiquitous and cheap for basic services.



    Then you build as many iFone doodads as possible to hang off the network for a small charge.



  • Reply 60 of 63
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by lungaretta

    Actually now I come to think about it, the inclusion of J2ME in Xcode smells very much like they may put a jvm in the ipod and let 3rd party developers make java apps that run on them. This will be a boon for the ipod, a new revenue source for developers and all run safely within the java sandbox so there'll be no security compromise wrt DRM etc.



    That's exactly what I was thinking.



    We might only see it on the color iPods for starters, but that technology will eventually reach the whole line&mdash;well, except for the shuffle.
Sign In or Register to comment.