Well, it was just reported on Engadget that iPhone's widescreen isn't legit widescreen, 16:9 ratio. That's quite depressing. I hope they fix that, I really do.
I thought that was obvious from the picture. It's not 16:9.
I agree, especially for a phone, that a little longer, and a little thinner, might be nice.
Well, it was just reported on Engadget that iPhone's widescreen isn't legit widescreen, 16:9 ratio. That's quite depressing. I hope they fix that, I really do.
"Depressing"? Huh. So when you watch your movie on the the 3.5" screen and notice the quarter inch black bar at the top you'll get "depressed"? Like you do when you watch the not-really-wide screen PSP?
Because that 1/4" is what's standing between a miserable, crippled movie experience and full 3.5" wide-screen cinema like experience?
The iPhone backlash articles are too amazing for words. This aspect ratio complaint is beyond ridiculous.
There are a lot of tradeoffs involved here, and they settled on something reasonable. If it is 1.78 (16/9) aspect ratio, imagine the black bars when watching 4:3 TV shows. If it was 2.35 (or whatever the super panoramic aspect ratio) like Pirates, there will be black bars on 1.78 HD aspect ratio screens. Argh...
Well, it was just reported on Engadget that iPhone's widescreen isn't legit widescreen, 16:9 ratio. That's quite depressing. I hope they fix that, I really do.
I like how the term widescreen gets suddenly updated. When Apple first shipped the TiPB it was the ONLY laptop with a widescreen display on the planet. It has a 3:2 ratio! Everyone jumped on the 3:2 ratio as widescreen bandwagon for a good 7 years! HD resolutions have extended what widescreen is, but not to the point of excluding an ratio that is significantly wider than it is tall -- duh! -- wide screen!
Now suddenly Engadget thinks they get to redefine what an entire industry has used in marketing materials for 7 years! Uhhh, no.
"Depressing"? Huh. So when you watch your movie on the the 3.5" screen and notice the quarter inch black bar at the top you'll get "depressed"? Like you do when you watch the not-really-wide screen PSP?
Because that 1/4" is what's standing between a miserable, crippled movie experience and full 3.5" wide-screen cinema like experience?
Bro, chill, don't be hostile. It's just a phrase, an exaggeration of my disappointment, that's all.
Bro, chill, don't be hostile. It's just a phrase, an exaggeration of my disappointment, that's all.
Not hostile at all, just amazed that the aspect ratio of the iPhone's screen got so much negative press, and engendered such dismay around the web.
Honestly, I can't imagine being even disappointed, for pretty much the reason I said: the difference in watching a very slightly letterboxed 16:9 video on the iPhone and a "true" 16:9 screen, at 3.5", is a fraction of an inch. Moreover, as has been pointed out, it's a fraction of an inch you get back the other way when watching 4:3 material.
And given that this very slight compromise is in service to all the other things the iPhone does, well, I just don't get the downside.
I have a Motorola SYNC right now (The phone cingular spends all day and night trying to advertise for: Rock the kashba commercial for instance). It's music is a jip, it's got 512 MB. This is the 'Music Phone', keep in mind.
I get about 60 songs on it, but here's the hassle, if you don't have Napster, you have to create an account and pay $15 a month to keep using your phone for music. At this point, that's not happening. That is part of the reason I flew right on board for the iPhone immediately. Also, I have a 80GB iPod. I got about 20GB remaining.
On top of that I have a MacBook Pro. ($1999 Model). My phone is in on 24 hours a day, and here's practically the breakdown on an average day:
8 Hours Charge
15 Hours In My Pocket
1 Hour In Use.
that's pretty average. You might say if you got an iPod why do you want this phone, I mean, that is the only major thing that seperates the iPhone from PDA's and such. You don't have to keep track of your iPod and take it everywhere with this, and on top of that, the new transfer purchased music from ipod feature on itunes is great, i can swap out tons of my friends music with this and I will be able to do that if I get an iPhone without bringing my iPod.
Here it gets ugly, if you got a video ipod, you know that videos suck the hell out of memory and battery. [For example, the 100 Minute Steve Jobs presentation of the iPhone is over 1GB. So, you can have like 500 Minutes of video (3 movies-ish)]. That leaves nothing for music, pics, your own videos (Not that you can do much with a Phone camera, but 2MP is not too bad for a phone. Not bad at all for a phone. The problem with that is people that are gonna dish out $600 are gonna be upperend people looking for upperend everything. Back to my scenario though, that I'm sure relates to some of you.
1) Right after watching Steve Job's 100 minute performance I practically was getting ready to go on eBay and sell all the crap I can to get my hands on that 8gb.
2) They're are tons of things that are on normal phones that are gonna be lacked on this iPhone, atleast on the first generation model.
a) EDGE? Why frickin edge? It's nothing compared to 3G. People around nothing can get EDGE, but if I recall Apple's trying to make money, and a few rare people compared to mass population doesn't hold up too great.
b) Battery-Life. It will not hold up great with Videos. All that on your Iphone will not help either with everything constantly running.
c) Gonna nead a Mac to do nearly everything on it. I have a Mac, but I bet most don't. I used to have a Windows.
3) That brings me to a great point, though. If you have ever owned a Mac after a Windows, the difference is crazy. It is unbelievable. Every little feature on Windows is expanded on Macs. On top of that, Macs add virctually twice as many features. Widgets are great, but on the iPhone, you can only have stocks and was it weather? 2nd Generation will be sure to have more than that. Hopefully you can download a few from Apple.com. Hopefully!
4) If I buy an iPhone, the 2nd generation will blow me away, Im sure. I owned a 2G iPod and have had the new gen. every step of the way since, including from 60GB Video to 80GB. (My 60Gb was full, though).
So, before I spend $600, Ill wait for the 16GB hard-drive. (That is what will be next, no 60 in sight, if I recall iPod SLOWLY CLIMBED TO 80GB. Took like 5 years. 2nd gen will likely have 3G.
A lot of this has been covered already but we'll do it again.
Quote:
[For example, the 100 Minute Steve Jobs presentation of the iPhone is over 1GB. So, you can have like 500 Minutes of video (3 movies-ish)]
The device is not intended to store a large movie or music collection.
Quote:
They're are tons of things that are on normal phones that are gonna be lacked on this iPhone, atleast on the first generation model.
Jobs obviously did not tell us everything. The iPhone has 5 months before any of us can use it, anything can be changed.
Quote:
a) EDGE? Why frickin edge? It's nothing compared to 3G. People around nothing can get EDGE, but if I recall Apple's trying to make money, and a few rare people compared to mass population doesn't hold up too great.
EDGE has more coverage across the US. 3G is slowly rolling out but is mostly only offered in major cities.
Quote:
Battery-Life. It will not hold up great with Videos. All that on your Iphone will not help either with everything constantly running.
Jobs said 5 hours of video playback. Which is better than the 30 GB iPod and Zune.
Quote:
Gonna nead a Mac to do nearly everything on it. I have a Mac, but I bet most don't. I used to have a Windows.
I doubt it. Jobs did not specifically describe how the iPhone would sync with the computer. Plus there is no way Apple can sell 10 million iPhone's by 2008 if it only works on the Mac.
Quote:
If I buy an iPhone, the 2nd generation will blow me away, Im sure. I owned a 2G iPod and have had the new gen. every step of the way since, including from 60GB Video to 80GB. (My 60Gb was full, though).
I don't know if you've ever tried to use a Palm or Blackberry. The 1st generation iPhones blow those away.
You can't really compare the 2G iPod to the 5G. They both mark where technology was at the time.
I have to disagree with the battery complaint. While more battery life is always welcome and appreciated, keep in mind that more battery life = bigger battery = bigger device. 5 hours of video is more than i would ever want to watch in one day anyway.
they said the ipod would have better battery life with video than what it does, ipods have horrible video life, thts obvious. alot of the stuff requires syncing with a mac he said. sure, they will progress over the next 5 months, but dont you think its preliminary to decide to wad out 600 bux. someone said that its better than a blackberry, of course it is, is it twice as good like the money shows? im just p[utting up points, i havent decided if ill buy or not.
teno, i know you cant compare the 2g to a 5g ipod. but im sure you wont be able to compare a 1g iphone to a 4g a few years down the road. thats my point. why bust out 600 bucks instead of buying it cheaper with more gb, memory, and capability. patience could be a matter of a few hundred dollars. i dunno if i have the patience though, well see what new features they have
Here it gets ugly, if you got a video ipod, you know that videos suck the hell out of memory and battery. ... That leaves nothing for music, pics, your own videos (Not that you can do much with a Phone camera, but 2MP is not too bad for a phone. Not bad at all for a phone. The problem with that is people that are gonna dish out $600 are gonna be upper-end people looking for upperend everything.
This is probably where the Apple iPhone is weakest. It's not that great of an iPod in terms of storage. A real iPod video probably should have somewhere in the neighborhood of 120 GB memory and 10 hours of playback (and a Firewire 800 connection). Perhaps that's what the real iPod video will be, and perhaps iPhone gen 3 could be more like that when 32 GB through 2 16 GB flash chips could be fit into the device. It won't catch up with a device that has hard disk storage though.
As it is, the usage patterns likely appear to be a ~1.5 GB music collection, 1.5 GB TV and 1/2 movie collection, and about 512 MB for internet communication, apps. This will be the sweetspot, numbers go up by 100% for the 8 GB version, and I bet there will be enough users where this amount of memory is more than enough in the first 6 months.
Quote:
1) Right after watching Steve Job's 100 minute performance I practically was getting ready to go on eBay and sell all the crap I can to get my hands on that 8gb.
I'm more than ready for the iPhone to replace my iPod mini and Treo 650 myself, but I have other realities.
Quote:
a) EDGE? Why frickin edge? It's nothing compared to 3G. People around nothing can get EDGE, but if I recall Apple's trying to make money, and a few rare people compared to mass population doesn't hold up too great.
We'll see how iPhone Safari performs with ~100 kbits/sec bandwidth. Web-browsing and email download/upload performance are the critical things here. If it is usable, iPhone gen 1 will be fine.
If you are looking towards downloading music, video and other multi-megabyte documents, iPhone 1G isn't designed for it. Apple prefers you sync with your computer for that.
Quote:
b) Battery-Life. It will not hold up great with Videos. All that on your Iphone will not help either with everything constantly running.
5 hours for video, WiFi, and talk time is fine. That's probably middle of the pack for phones and PMPs. If you need more, I'm sure a battery extendor accessory will be sold. Just think of a battery extendor as a user replaceable battery feature.
Quote:
c) Gonna nead a Mac to do nearly everything on it. I have a Mac, but I bet most don't. I used to have a Windows.
I don't understand this comment. iPhone will sync with iTunes which can run on 90+% of PCs in the world. That will likely be the only officially sanctioned way for trasferring stuff in and out of the iPhone.
Quote:
3) ... Widgets are great, but on the iPhone, you can only have stocks and was it weather? 2nd Generation will be sure to have more than that. Hopefully you can download a few from Apple.com.
This is an advantage of the iPhone, new apps and widgets can be uploaded from iTunes. iPhone OS X can be updated through an updater like iPods. I would expect more apps and widgets to be available on the iPhone than what has been demonstrated.
I'm still waiting for games to show up!
Quote:
So, before I spend $600, Ill wait for the 16GB hard-drive. (That is what will be next, no 60 in sight, if I recall iPod SLOWLY CLIMBED TO 80GB. Took like 5 years. 2nd gen will likely have 3G.
If Apple wants to sell in Europe in Q4 07, they'll likely need a 3G version to be able to compete. I wouldn't be surprised to see them selling it in the US while the G1 versions go down to $399 and $499, maybe less.
5 years is a good prediction. Maybe six years. Basic "Moore's Law", every 18-24 months, chip density doubles. The current mass market affordable maximum flash size is probably 4 GB. Apple probably uses 2 of those for the 8 GB version. It will take another 3 chip density doublings to get to 32 GB flash chips. That's 5 to 6 years. Of course, Apple could ship an 80 GB version in 5 months if they are willing to use an 80 GB 1.8" hard drive and let the iPhone be ~18 mm thick, but they don't want to do that.
An interesting question will be if they sell a 299$ version by H1 08 and how much will it be cut down. If iSuppli is right, they could sell the 8GB version for $299 and still be profitable assuming the R&D costs have been paid for. By H1 08, a 4G may even have 30+% margin.
This is probably where the Apple iPhone is weakest. It's not that great of an iPod in terms of storage.
Once you take weight and dimensions into consideration, it really compares more to an iPod nano anyway.
Quote:
A real iPod video probably should have somewhere in the neighborhood of 120 GB memory and 10 hours of playback (and a Firewire 800 connection).
By mid-'07, there might be a 120 GBs 1.8-inch drive; right now, to my knowledge, 100 GBs is as far as it gets.
FireWire 800, on the other hand, will likely never be relevant for 1.8-inch drives. Even the speeds of USB 2.0 or FireWire 400 aren't even remotely used up by such a drive. The connection is not the bottleneck; the drive speed is.
Quote:
Perhaps that's what the real iPod video will be,
Or perhaps there simply ain't no such thing.
Quote:
and perhaps iPhone gen 3 could be more like that when 32 GB through 2 16 GB flash chips could be fit into the device.
By the third revision, sure, that's quite plausible.
Quote:
It won't catch up with a device that has hard disk storage though.
Nor will it have to. For a smartphone, its storage is very high-end, if you look at competitors.
One problem with 3G is that the FCC is a useless agaency, and so the frequency for UMTS is different in the States then it is for the rest of the world (kinda like how they rolled out different GSM frequencies last generation).
Therefore a 3G iPhone model would either need to be TriBand UMTS[1] or two models: one world model using the 2100 MHz UMTS band and one using the two Cingular UMTS bands for the States.
The States model would not have 3G access anywhere but the U.S. and would not work at all in Japan or South Korea[2]. The world model would work anywhere with GSM plus Japan and South Korea but would not have 3G speed in the United States.
I don't know how small a triBand UMTS phone could be made so the two model option seems likely. As for battery life 3G powers on only when needed, and uses less than WiFi, so it probably wouldn't knock it down to much.
For Europe they probably need a 3G model and they absolutely need a 3G model for South Korea/Japan[2].
[1]UMTS=3G GSM standard. Currently either WCDMA or the faster HSDPA. HSDPA is backwards compatible with WCDMA. WCDMA hardware is forwards compatible at WCDMA speed.
[2] Both Softbank and DoCoMo in Japan use UMTS so any 2100 MHz band UMTS phone can work there (so Apple doesn't have to worry about their old, weird, 2G networks) and both have ~97% coverage in Japan including subways. All 3G in South Korea is mandated to use UMTS/HSDPA, and they have two networks with good coverage up and running, so it doesn't matter that their 2G network isn't GSM.
One problem with 3G is that the FCC is a useless agaency, and so the frequency for UMTS is different in the States then it is for the rest of the world (kinda like how they rolled out different GSM frequencies last generation).
Therefore a 3G iPhone model would either need to be TriBand UMTS[1] or two models: one world model using the 2100 MHz UMTS band and one using the two Cingular UMTS bands for the States.
Considering the 2.75G iPhone is quad-band, I don't see why it couldn't also be tri-band for 3G.
Quote:
[1]UMTS=3G GSM standard. Currently either WCDMA or the faster HSDPA. HSDPA is backwards compatible with WCDMA. WCDMA hardware is forwards compatible at WCDMA speed.
UMTS is a form of W-CDMA. HSDPA is a data standard that can be used atop UMTS. The other common W-CDMA implementation is FOMA.
Once you take weight and dimensions into consideration, it really compares more to an iPod nano anyway.
I don't see how you can say so.
iPod nano: 3.5 x1.6 x 0.26 inches, 1.4 ounces
iPod 30GB: 4.1 x 2.4 x 0.43 inches, 4.8 ounces
iPod 80 GB: 4.1 x 2.4 x 0.55 inches, 5.5 ounces
iPhone: 4.5 x 2.4 x 0.46 inches, 4.8 ounces
The iPhone is quite clearly iPod sized. Moreover, it is Treo, iPaq, Q, Blackjack, E61, etc, sized, but thinner. Apple will compare it to phones that give them an advantage.
Apple can get a 40-GB 1.8" drive that is 5 mm or 0.2 inches thick that could probably fit into the iPhone form factor, but I can understand that flash uses less power, is more durable, and will gradually increase in capacity every year on top of storage ceiling (50 GB?) for most users. Maybe they'll introduce an ultra edition with 80 GB next year.
Quote:
By mid-'07, there might be a 120 GBs 1.8-inch drive; right now, to my knowledge, 100 GBs is as far as it gets.
FireWire 800, on the other hand, will likely never be relevant for 1.8-inch drives. Even the speeds of USB 2.0 or FireWire 400 aren't even remotely used up by such a drive. The connection is not the bottleneck; the drive speed is.
Remotely? It can get close.
Toshiba's 1.8" drives support Ultra DMA ATA/100: 100 MB/s theoretical bandwidth for bursts. Firewire 800 is theoretically 100 MB/s bandwidth too. Whether Apple uses the ATA/100 features, I don't know, probably not, but the theoretical bandwidths are the same and I'd wager the real-world are relatively close. For sustained, it can probably eat 50 to 60% of 1394 or USB2 theoretical.
Quote:
Or perhaps there simply ain't no such thing.
Obviously not. A G6 iPod that could debut this Summer will likely be 100 GB and USB2. The 10 hour playback is a thickness decision for Apple. They can probably squeeze another hour or two with better software optimization, more efficient parts, and a slightly bigger battery and still fit in the same thicknesses.
Let us all hope it will have the same iPhone touchscreen and OS X.
Quote:
Nor will it have to. For a smartphone, its storage is very high-end, if you look at competitors.
It depends on Apple releasing an iPod with same functionality except for the phone/WiFi parts, no? It's probably a foregone conclusion. Still, as a device that is advertized as an iPod, a phone, and Internet Communicator running OS X, it probably should have a version with 30+ GB of storage.
Considering the 2.75G iPhone is quad-band, I don't see why it couldn't also be tri-band for 3G.
UMTS is a form of W-CDMA. HSDPA is a data standard that can be used atop UMTS. The other common W-CDMA implementation is FOMA.
Because it would make the phone bigger as 3G circuitry is more complex than GSM. And Steve hates bigness (or at least thickness), apparently. You can do it, but it makes for much bigger phones.
Actually the Japanese (specifically NTT DoCoMo) deployed WCDMA as the first major 3G network using the FOMA air interface. They then lobbied to get WCDMA adopted as the UMTS standard and were successful. Recently FOMA has been upgraded to be fully UMTS compatible as it wasn't for the first couple of years. These days it's just a brand name.
HSDPA is a hardware upgrade for WCDMA. Both WCDMA and HSDPA are UMTS. UMTS was designed to transparently and cheaply upgrade forward/backward with faster data. Also to be single band across the world, but the FCC screwed the pouch on that one.
I'm not too worried about storage for now. I mean, I won't be getting one for a while, but by the time I get one, the storage will be ample, especially with the sudden outbrake of SSDs and higher density flash memory. So, really, I'm not worrying about that for now, though I do feel that they should have more than 8GBs of storage, considering that they're touting it as a video player, also.
Comments
Well, it was just reported on Engadget that iPhone's widescreen isn't legit widescreen, 16:9 ratio. That's quite depressing. I hope they fix that, I really do.
I thought that was obvious from the picture. It's not 16:9.
I agree, especially for a phone, that a little longer, and a little thinner, might be nice.
Well, it was just reported on Engadget that iPhone's widescreen isn't legit widescreen, 16:9 ratio. That's quite depressing. I hope they fix that, I really do.
"Depressing"? Huh. So when you watch your movie on the the 3.5" screen and notice the quarter inch black bar at the top you'll get "depressed"? Like you do when you watch the not-really-wide screen PSP?
Because that 1/4" is what's standing between a miserable, crippled movie experience and full 3.5" wide-screen cinema like experience?
There are a lot of tradeoffs involved here, and they settled on something reasonable. If it is 1.78 (16/9) aspect ratio, imagine the black bars when watching 4:3 TV shows. If it was 2.35 (or whatever the super panoramic aspect ratio) like Pirates, there will be black bars on 1.78 HD aspect ratio screens. Argh...
Plus having a wider screen allows them to fit the keyboard in portrait view. Any skinnier and it would have been impossible
Good point.
Well, it was just reported on Engadget that iPhone's widescreen isn't legit widescreen, 16:9 ratio. That's quite depressing. I hope they fix that, I really do.
I like how the term widescreen gets suddenly updated. When Apple first shipped the TiPB it was the ONLY laptop with a widescreen display on the planet. It has a 3:2 ratio! Everyone jumped on the 3:2 ratio as widescreen bandwagon for a good 7 years! HD resolutions have extended what widescreen is, but not to the point of excluding an ratio that is significantly wider than it is tall -- duh! -- wide screen!
Now suddenly Engadget thinks they get to redefine what an entire industry has used in marketing materials for 7 years! Uhhh, no.
"Depressing"? Huh. So when you watch your movie on the the 3.5" screen and notice the quarter inch black bar at the top you'll get "depressed"? Like you do when you watch the not-really-wide screen PSP?
Because that 1/4" is what's standing between a miserable, crippled movie experience and full 3.5" wide-screen cinema like experience?
Bro, chill, don't be hostile. It's just a phrase, an exaggeration of my disappointment, that's all.
Bro, chill, don't be hostile. It's just a phrase, an exaggeration of my disappointment, that's all.
Not hostile at all, just amazed that the aspect ratio of the iPhone's screen got so much negative press, and engendered such dismay around the web.
Honestly, I can't imagine being even disappointed, for pretty much the reason I said: the difference in watching a very slightly letterboxed 16:9 video on the iPhone and a "true" 16:9 screen, at 3.5", is a fraction of an inch. Moreover, as has been pointed out, it's a fraction of an inch you get back the other way when watching 4:3 material.
And given that this very slight compromise is in service to all the other things the iPhone does, well, I just don't get the downside.
I have a Motorola SYNC right now (The phone cingular spends all day and night trying to advertise for: Rock the kashba commercial for instance). It's music is a jip, it's got 512 MB. This is the 'Music Phone', keep in mind.
I get about 60 songs on it, but here's the hassle, if you don't have Napster, you have to create an account and pay $15 a month to keep using your phone for music. At this point, that's not happening. That is part of the reason I flew right on board for the iPhone immediately. Also, I have a 80GB iPod. I got about 20GB remaining.
On top of that I have a MacBook Pro. ($1999 Model). My phone is in on 24 hours a day, and here's practically the breakdown on an average day:
8 Hours Charge
15 Hours In My Pocket
1 Hour In Use.
that's pretty average. You might say if you got an iPod why do you want this phone, I mean, that is the only major thing that seperates the iPhone from PDA's and such. You don't have to keep track of your iPod and take it everywhere with this, and on top of that, the new transfer purchased music from ipod feature on itunes is great, i can swap out tons of my friends music with this and I will be able to do that if I get an iPhone without bringing my iPod.
1) Right after watching Steve Job's 100 minute performance I practically was getting ready to go on eBay and sell all the crap I can to get my hands on that 8gb.
2) They're are tons of things that are on normal phones that are gonna be lacked on this iPhone, atleast on the first generation model.
a) EDGE? Why frickin edge? It's nothing compared to 3G. People around nothing can get EDGE, but if I recall Apple's trying to make money, and a few rare people compared to mass population doesn't hold up too great.
b) Battery-Life. It will not hold up great with Videos. All that on your Iphone will not help either with everything constantly running.
c) Gonna nead a Mac to do nearly everything on it. I have a Mac, but I bet most don't. I used to have a Windows.
3) That brings me to a great point, though. If you have ever owned a Mac after a Windows, the difference is crazy. It is unbelievable. Every little feature on Windows is expanded on Macs. On top of that, Macs add virctually twice as many features. Widgets are great, but on the iPhone, you can only have stocks and was it weather? 2nd Generation will be sure to have more than that. Hopefully you can download a few from Apple.com. Hopefully!
4) If I buy an iPhone, the 2nd generation will blow me away, Im sure. I owned a 2G iPod and have had the new gen. every step of the way since, including from 60GB Video to 80GB. (My 60Gb was full, though).
So, before I spend $600, Ill wait for the 16GB hard-drive. (That is what will be next, no 60 in sight, if I recall iPod SLOWLY CLIMBED TO 80GB. Took like 5 years. 2nd gen will likely have 3G.
[For example, the 100 Minute Steve Jobs presentation of the iPhone is over 1GB. So, you can have like 500 Minutes of video (3 movies-ish)]
The device is not intended to store a large movie or music collection.
They're are tons of things that are on normal phones that are gonna be lacked on this iPhone, atleast on the first generation model.
Jobs obviously did not tell us everything. The iPhone has 5 months before any of us can use it, anything can be changed.
a) EDGE? Why frickin edge? It's nothing compared to 3G. People around nothing can get EDGE, but if I recall Apple's trying to make money, and a few rare people compared to mass population doesn't hold up too great.
EDGE has more coverage across the US. 3G is slowly rolling out but is mostly only offered in major cities.
Battery-Life. It will not hold up great with Videos. All that on your Iphone will not help either with everything constantly running.
Jobs said 5 hours of video playback. Which is better than the 30 GB iPod and Zune.
Gonna nead a Mac to do nearly everything on it. I have a Mac, but I bet most don't. I used to have a Windows.
I doubt it. Jobs did not specifically describe how the iPhone would sync with the computer. Plus there is no way Apple can sell 10 million iPhone's by 2008 if it only works on the Mac.
If I buy an iPhone, the 2nd generation will blow me away, Im sure. I owned a 2G iPod and have had the new gen. every step of the way since, including from 60GB Video to 80GB. (My 60Gb was full, though).
I don't know if you've ever tried to use a Palm or Blackberry. The 1st generation iPhones blow those away.
You can't really compare the 2G iPod to the 5G. They both mark where technology was at the time.
Here it gets ugly, if you got a video ipod, you know that videos suck the hell out of memory and battery. ... That leaves nothing for music, pics, your own videos (Not that you can do much with a Phone camera, but 2MP is not too bad for a phone. Not bad at all for a phone. The problem with that is people that are gonna dish out $600 are gonna be upper-end people looking for upperend everything.
This is probably where the Apple iPhone is weakest. It's not that great of an iPod in terms of storage. A real iPod video probably should have somewhere in the neighborhood of 120 GB memory and 10 hours of playback (and a Firewire 800 connection). Perhaps that's what the real iPod video will be, and perhaps iPhone gen 3 could be more like that when 32 GB through 2 16 GB flash chips could be fit into the device. It won't catch up with a device that has hard disk storage though.
As it is, the usage patterns likely appear to be a ~1.5 GB music collection, 1.5 GB TV and 1/2 movie collection, and about 512 MB for internet communication, apps. This will be the sweetspot, numbers go up by 100% for the 8 GB version, and I bet there will be enough users where this amount of memory is more than enough in the first 6 months.
1) Right after watching Steve Job's 100 minute performance I practically was getting ready to go on eBay and sell all the crap I can to get my hands on that 8gb.
I'm more than ready for the iPhone to replace my iPod mini and Treo 650 myself, but I have other realities.
a) EDGE? Why frickin edge? It's nothing compared to 3G. People around nothing can get EDGE, but if I recall Apple's trying to make money, and a few rare people compared to mass population doesn't hold up too great.
We'll see how iPhone Safari performs with ~100 kbits/sec bandwidth. Web-browsing and email download/upload performance are the critical things here. If it is usable, iPhone gen 1 will be fine.
If you are looking towards downloading music, video and other multi-megabyte documents, iPhone 1G isn't designed for it. Apple prefers you sync with your computer for that.
b) Battery-Life. It will not hold up great with Videos. All that on your Iphone will not help either with everything constantly running.
5 hours for video, WiFi, and talk time is fine. That's probably middle of the pack for phones and PMPs. If you need more, I'm sure a battery extendor accessory will be sold. Just think of a battery extendor as a user replaceable battery feature.
c) Gonna nead a Mac to do nearly everything on it. I have a Mac, but I bet most don't. I used to have a Windows.
I don't understand this comment. iPhone will sync with iTunes which can run on 90+% of PCs in the world. That will likely be the only officially sanctioned way for trasferring stuff in and out of the iPhone.
3) ... Widgets are great, but on the iPhone, you can only have stocks and was it weather? 2nd Generation will be sure to have more than that. Hopefully you can download a few from Apple.com.
This is an advantage of the iPhone, new apps and widgets can be uploaded from iTunes. iPhone OS X can be updated through an updater like iPods. I would expect more apps and widgets to be available on the iPhone than what has been demonstrated.
I'm still waiting for games to show up!
So, before I spend $600, Ill wait for the 16GB hard-drive. (That is what will be next, no 60 in sight, if I recall iPod SLOWLY CLIMBED TO 80GB. Took like 5 years. 2nd gen will likely have 3G.
If Apple wants to sell in Europe in Q4 07, they'll likely need a 3G version to be able to compete. I wouldn't be surprised to see them selling it in the US while the G1 versions go down to $399 and $499, maybe less.
5 years is a good prediction. Maybe six years. Basic "Moore's Law", every 18-24 months, chip density doubles. The current mass market affordable maximum flash size is probably 4 GB. Apple probably uses 2 of those for the 8 GB version. It will take another 3 chip density doublings to get to 32 GB flash chips. That's 5 to 6 years. Of course, Apple could ship an 80 GB version in 5 months if they are willing to use an 80 GB 1.8" hard drive and let the iPhone be ~18 mm thick, but they don't want to do that.
An interesting question will be if they sell a 299$ version by H1 08 and how much will it be cut down. If iSuppli is right, they could sell the 8GB version for $299 and still be profitable assuming the R&D costs have been paid for. By H1 08, a 4G may even have 30+% margin.
This is probably where the Apple iPhone is weakest. It's not that great of an iPod in terms of storage.
Once you take weight and dimensions into consideration, it really compares more to an iPod nano anyway.
A real iPod video probably should have somewhere in the neighborhood of 120 GB memory and 10 hours of playback (and a Firewire 800 connection).
By mid-'07, there might be a 120 GBs 1.8-inch drive; right now, to my knowledge, 100 GBs is as far as it gets.
FireWire 800, on the other hand, will likely never be relevant for 1.8-inch drives. Even the speeds of USB 2.0 or FireWire 400 aren't even remotely used up by such a drive. The connection is not the bottleneck; the drive speed is.
Perhaps that's what the real iPod video will be,
Or perhaps there simply ain't no such thing.
and perhaps iPhone gen 3 could be more like that when 32 GB through 2 16 GB flash chips could be fit into the device.
By the third revision, sure, that's quite plausible.
It won't catch up with a device that has hard disk storage though.
Nor will it have to.
Therefore a 3G iPhone model would either need to be TriBand UMTS[1] or two models: one world model using the 2100 MHz UMTS band and one using the two Cingular UMTS bands for the States.
The States model would not have 3G access anywhere but the U.S. and would not work at all in Japan or South Korea[2]. The world model would work anywhere with GSM plus Japan and South Korea but would not have 3G speed in the United States.
I don't know how small a triBand UMTS phone could be made so the two model option seems likely. As for battery life 3G powers on only when needed, and uses less than WiFi, so it probably wouldn't knock it down to much.
For Europe they probably need a 3G model and they absolutely need a 3G model for South Korea/Japan[2].
[1]UMTS=3G GSM standard. Currently either WCDMA or the faster HSDPA. HSDPA is backwards compatible with WCDMA. WCDMA hardware is forwards compatible at WCDMA speed.
[2] Both Softbank and DoCoMo in Japan use UMTS so any 2100 MHz band UMTS phone can work there (so Apple doesn't have to worry about their old, weird, 2G networks) and both have ~97% coverage in Japan including subways. All 3G in South Korea is mandated to use UMTS/HSDPA, and they have two networks with good coverage up and running, so it doesn't matter that their 2G network isn't GSM.
One problem with 3G is that the FCC is a useless agaency, and so the frequency for UMTS is different in the States then it is for the rest of the world (kinda like how they rolled out different GSM frequencies last generation).
Therefore a 3G iPhone model would either need to be TriBand UMTS[1] or two models: one world model using the 2100 MHz UMTS band and one using the two Cingular UMTS bands for the States.
Considering the 2.75G iPhone is quad-band, I don't see why it couldn't also be tri-band for 3G.
[1]UMTS=3G GSM standard. Currently either WCDMA or the faster HSDPA. HSDPA is backwards compatible with WCDMA. WCDMA hardware is forwards compatible at WCDMA speed.
UMTS is a form of W-CDMA. HSDPA is a data standard that can be used atop UMTS. The other common W-CDMA implementation is FOMA.
Once you take weight and dimensions into consideration, it really compares more to an iPod nano anyway.
I don't see how you can say so.
iPod nano: 3.5 x1.6 x 0.26 inches, 1.4 ounces
iPod 30GB: 4.1 x 2.4 x 0.43 inches, 4.8 ounces
iPod 80 GB: 4.1 x 2.4 x 0.55 inches, 5.5 ounces
iPhone: 4.5 x 2.4 x 0.46 inches, 4.8 ounces
The iPhone is quite clearly iPod sized. Moreover, it is Treo, iPaq, Q, Blackjack, E61, etc, sized, but thinner. Apple will compare it to phones that give them an advantage.
Apple can get a 40-GB 1.8" drive that is 5 mm or 0.2 inches thick that could probably fit into the iPhone form factor, but I can understand that flash uses less power, is more durable, and will gradually increase in capacity every year on top of storage ceiling (50 GB?) for most users. Maybe they'll introduce an ultra edition with 80 GB next year.
By mid-'07, there might be a 120 GBs 1.8-inch drive; right now, to my knowledge, 100 GBs is as far as it gets.
FireWire 800, on the other hand, will likely never be relevant for 1.8-inch drives. Even the speeds of USB 2.0 or FireWire 400 aren't even remotely used up by such a drive. The connection is not the bottleneck; the drive speed is.
Remotely? It can get close.
Toshiba's 1.8" drives support Ultra DMA ATA/100: 100 MB/s theoretical bandwidth for bursts. Firewire 800 is theoretically 100 MB/s bandwidth too. Whether Apple uses the ATA/100 features, I don't know, probably not, but the theoretical bandwidths are the same and I'd wager the real-world are relatively close. For sustained, it can probably eat 50 to 60% of 1394 or USB2 theoretical.
Or perhaps there simply ain't no such thing.
Obviously not. A G6 iPod that could debut this Summer will likely be 100 GB and USB2. The 10 hour playback is a thickness decision for Apple. They can probably squeeze another hour or two with better software optimization, more efficient parts, and a slightly bigger battery and still fit in the same thicknesses.
Let us all hope it will have the same iPhone touchscreen and OS X.
Nor will it have to.
It depends on Apple releasing an iPod with same functionality except for the phone/WiFi parts, no? It's probably a foregone conclusion. Still, as a device that is advertized as an iPod, a phone, and Internet Communicator running OS X, it probably should have a version with 30+ GB of storage.
Considering the 2.75G iPhone is quad-band, I don't see why it couldn't also be tri-band for 3G.
UMTS is a form of W-CDMA. HSDPA is a data standard that can be used atop UMTS. The other common W-CDMA implementation is FOMA.
Because it would make the phone bigger as 3G circuitry is more complex than GSM. And Steve hates bigness (or at least thickness), apparently. You can do it, but it makes for much bigger phones.
Actually the Japanese (specifically NTT DoCoMo) deployed WCDMA as the first major 3G network using the FOMA air interface. They then lobbied to get WCDMA adopted as the UMTS standard and were successful. Recently FOMA has been upgraded to be fully UMTS compatible as it wasn't for the first couple of years. These days it's just a brand name.
HSDPA is a hardware upgrade for WCDMA. Both WCDMA and HSDPA are UMTS. UMTS was designed to transparently and cheaply upgrade forward/backward with faster data. Also to be single band across the world, but the FCC screwed the pouch on that one.