it seems to me that the iPhone does most of what people use their laptops for except for word processing. This thing could replace the laptop for the general public. I know hardcore users and people using it for business won't see it that way but consumers will once they use it. Assuming internet searches don't take to long on Edge.
Now, before anyone pops up with 'I want an open...' we can drop that idea right now.... as much as we'd all like an 'open phone' neither the cell phone makers nor the cell service providers want us to have it so it ain't gonna happen - we live in a world where the companies are exerting more and more control over our very lives and it's only getting worse...
- They control how/where we watch moves (region code crap)
- They control the ability to record time-shift shows (broadcast flag)
- They control the level of quality you get to see and/or the ability to see the content at all when watching a new hidef dvd - used as generic term (via HDCP or whatever its called)
- They control how we use almost every aspect of using the cell phone and have the ability to charge monthly fees for features that were built into the phone and don't need any 'support' from the provider.
The list goes on and on.... Like I said it's only going to get worse as more companies / industries realize they too can impose a MUCH tighter grip on its customers and at the same time profit more from doing so...
If we 'the citizens of the WORLD' don't put a stop to it soon it'll snowball.
Dave
Dave - I fully agree with your assessment of what the mobile phone cartel companies (mostly) want to do as far as draconian assertion of control of the user experience. And Verizon Wireless is legendary for being the worst of the lot in this regard (including having lost a class-action suit against it for having crippled the BlueTooth capabilities of that one Motorola phone (the 715?)).
But I think the genie is out of the bottle as far as their potential to succeed in this: They (the carriers/operators) are in a race to provide ever more capable phones, and ever more powerful data capabilities ... but the very process of doing so subverts their desires, as "more powerful" for computing type devices--including mobile phones--means (in part) being programmable. And the more programmable the device, with ever better data connectivity, the more control is inevitably relinquished to the end users. The carriers don't want it to mean this ... they fervently work to impede it meaning this, but they are fighting a losing battle.
As for the phone manufacturers, I'm not so sure that they have quite the same anti-end-user agenda. I think that (in general) they want to differentiate their phones by how cool & useful the end users find them to be. (Most of those manufactures clearly don't really know how to do that, but that's a different problem. ) But, with the phone distribution model that has mostly infected the U.S. market (esp. the carrier-subsidization part, which becomes contingent on carrier vetting of each model phone and its capabilities), the phone manufacturer's customer -- the one who makes the initial selection decision -- is the carrier, and not the end user.
So what's the saving grace? Several things ... the ongoing advance of the capabilities of mobile phones qua computers, the ongoing advance of data connectivity, ... and competition (hi, Adam Smith! ). To whit, this week the iPhone is revealed (for example). And the coolness, effectiveness, usability, etc that it offers--all the things that leave so many of us drooling & counting the days until we can get one--won't let that genie get put back in the bottle. A very pointed and accelerated version of what's been happening month by month, model by model, already.
So be hopeful ... and vote with your dollars, for both equipment and services, that keep advancing the trends in the favor of us, the end users!
If I were to call it anything else it would be an iPod without a screen a cludgy, limited function remote. And in the case of a remote, having something that small is not a bonus. It's an annoyance when it becomes lost to ever find again.
Did you listen to the keynote? It is a wireless way of displaying media on a HD TV. It synchs like an iPod so it will be instantly usable by almost everyone and it will store lots of music and movies AND allows son Johnny's MacBook and daughter Jenny's MacBookPro to stream content from the sofa as well.
All remotes are lost roughly at the same rate regardless of size. Smaller ones more easily fall into smaller places, but people take more care of them.
Quote:
I get your point, but it's sort of planned obsolesence. I have a 5G iPod and it might be obsolete tomorrow but I don't know that ahead of time. 720p has already been superceded by something superior so why would Apple pick 720p when there was a better standard already available? That's what annoys me about it. I already know it's not the best, and I can expect in a year to be replacing it with AppleTV that actually handles 1080p. It's pretty much the same reason others are annoyed that the AppleTV and new Airport Extreme don't have gigabit ethernet ports.
Does anyone know the market for 720p vs. 1080p TV's.
Quote:
That's my fear is that Apple will hold off on the true video iPod to ensure it doesn't affect iPhone sales. I would be all over this phone if it had a larger storage capacity. As it is, I'd end up carrying the iPhone and my 5G iPod to have all my music and video. Hardly the solution that Apple was going for.
The iPhone is a communication device that can play songs and movies. IT IS NOT AN iPOD!!! It will never (in the next 4 years anyway) hold 10,000 songs, because it isn't meant to!!! It has its own section on the Apple website. In less than 2 years it will have its own department within Apple, like the iPod. The iPod with clickwheel will be around for awhile because of exactly what you are describing. Apple would love for you to own an iPhone and a 5G iPod!!!
The whole point of doing the iPhone now was to get that UI and the Multi-touch technology out there and patented in a device in a market (mobile phones) that is big enough to make Apple money while it works of Tablets and other devices that can use the Multi-touch tech even more. This is just the beginning. That is also why they added a version of OSX on to the thing. Why the overkill? Sure for all of the security and power management and all, but really for the future devices that will need a new GUI and OS. Just like FrontRow, Apple is designing new OSX based UI's that it will be evolving right along side the Mac for the next 30 years. And you're worried about one phone coming out in June with one carrier?!?!?!
Did you listen to the keynote? It is a wireless way of displaying media on a HD TV. It synchs like an iPod so it will be instantly usable by almost everyone and it will store lots of music and movies AND allows son Johnny's MacBook and daughter Jenny's MacBookPro to stream content from the sofa as well.
All remotes are lost roughly at the same rate regardless of size. Smaller ones more easily fall into smaller places, but people take more care of them.
Does anyone know the market for 720p vs. 1080p TV's.
The iPhone is a communication device that can play songs and movies. IT IS NOT AN iPOD!!! It will never (in the next 4 years anyway) hold 10,000 songs, because it isn't meant to!!! It has its own section on the Apple website. In less than 2 years it will have its own department within Apple, like the iPod. The iPod with clickwheel will be around for awhile because of exactly what you are describing. Apple would love for you to own an iPhone and a 5G iPod!!!
The whole point of doing the iPhone now was to get that UI and the Multi-touch technology out there and patented in a device in a market (mobile phones) that is big enough to make Apple money while it works of Tablets and other devices that can use the Multi-touch tech even more. This is just the beginning. That is also why they added a version of OSX on to the thing. Why the overkill? Sure for all of the security and power management and all, but really for the future devices that will need a new GUI and OS. Just like FrontRow, Apple is designing new OSX based UI's that it will be evolving right along side the Mac for the next 30 years. And you're worried about one phone coming out in June with one carrier?!?!?!
The market for HD TV's in the US is pretty miniscule to begin with. And I don't doubt that the market for 1080p would probably fall close to 0%. But that wasn't my point. It's already knowing there IS something better out there, knowing that if Apple wants to continue in the media device market it WILL release an updated version that handles 1080p but knowing they decided to make this device already underpowered for TODAY's current best quality video solution.
And regardless of it's size, the Apple Remote is bare bones at best. 6 buttons doesn't provide many functions. Want to mute the sound? Keep hitting the volume down button until it's muted, no one button choice that is STANDARD on pretty much every remote. Granted, a mute option is not standard on ANY current Apple product but still.
As for your last point, about the iPhone not being an iPod maybe you should go visit Apple's official iPhone website. It pretty clearly states the iPhone IS an iPod.
So basically the latest iPod comes bundled with a 2-year commitment. I don't really care what network it's on, but the fact that this is the only way to get the latest iPod.
I'm sure Apple is happy for me to buy an iPhone and an iPod but if they really want to support that they need to drop the BS about the iPhone being the convergence device they're hyping it as. It doesn't fit my needs as an iPod, one of Apple's own key selling points for the device.
And yes I am only concerned about one product coming out in June. As a consumer, I' don't give a flying fart about Apple's long term plans for the multi-touch technology. According to your argument, the iPhone is basically a $500/600 beta test program to see how it works in the real world. And there is and never was anything revolutionary about Front Row; it's basically a prettier version of the iPod interface. Do I want Apple to be successful: Yes. Do I want them to succeed at my expense: No.
Sorry, you're right. I forgot about the mute button on the keyboard. I was thinking about in the software. The master volume control doesn't contain a mute option except to move the volume all the way down at which point it indicates being muted. Having spent many years in a Windows world, I'm sort of accustomed to the check box by the volume slider to immediately mute it. I don't think iTunes has a mute option either.
Is the Cingular contract really necessary? Won't you be able to buy an iPhone in the aftermarket, unlock it, and install your current SIM card to use with any GSM network? Even if the phone is sold locked, I would think someone would find a hack to unlock it very quickly because of the high demand for it.
And regardless of it's size, the Apple Remote is bare bones at best. 6 buttons doesn't provide many functions. Want to mute the sound? Keep hitting the volume down button until it's muted, no one button choice that is STANDARD on pretty much every remote. Granted, a mute option is not standard on ANY current Apple product but still.
I agree with you that the remote could use a few more buttons. It would be good to be able to hit the volume down button twice quickly to move it to mute. In general I like Apple's view to simplify the hardware and have the software get smarter.
Quote:
As for your last point, about the iPhone not being an iPod maybe you should go visit Apple's official iPhone website. It pretty clearly states the iPhone IS an iPod.
So basically the latest iPod comes bundled with a 2-year commitment. I don't really care what network it's on, but the fact that this is the only way to get the latest iPod.
It is a new device, an iPod, a phone and a web communication device. But that is the way Jobs framed the question to show people how the phone will compare with other smart phones. But it is not an iPod! It is a nano in a phone form. If it were an iPod, it would be under the iPod tab on the website. I'd like to see the internal org chart for Apple to see exactly who is working on this - just the iPod group or a consortium of folks from many departments. Again I bet it will be its own subsection of Apple soon enough.
Quote:
I'm sure Apple is happy for me to buy an iPhone and an iPod but if they really want to support that they need to drop the BS about the iPhone being the convergence device they're hyping it as. It doesn't fit my needs as an iPod, one of Apple's own key selling points for the device.
I think you are missing the point. It has iPod Nano functionality, but it is not an iPod. The iPhone is a communication device that also converges mp3 playing. Its killer functions is to optimize each function by allowing the keyboard to change as needed for each function. By definition and converging device does not have to make the iPod that you have obsolete. You may need all of your music together in one place, but you don't need all of that on a phone since you can't listen to it all. Jobs said that many phones do have some songs, but that (just like the little cameras) most people stop using them after the first month. I believe he is betting that 8 gigs of music, podcasts, photos, etc. are what most people want with them at any one time - and the statistics bear that out with the Nano. So as a converging device, it works, it just isn't going to replace a REAL iPOD. It replaces the iPOD NANO. Does this make sense?
Quote:
And yes I am only concerned about one product coming out in June. As a consumer, I' don't give a flying fart about Apple's long term plans for the multi-touch technology. According to your argument, the iPhone is basically a $500/600 beta test program to see how it works in the real world. And there is and never was anything revolutionary about Front Row; it's basically a prettier version of the iPod interface. Do I want Apple to be successful: Yes. Do I want them to succeed at my expense: No.
I certainly agree that you shouldn't foot the bill for version one tech. That's what early adopters do and will do just fine in June. You can thank them later while you keep your own phone and iPod and wait for the right price/functionality mix for you.
You can wait until 2008, like me to see what devices work well for me when my Verizon contract ends. I may still stay with Verizon though if the iPhone isn't useful enough or still too expensive. However the Verizon V-cast stuff does not interest me either, so if Apple can get the price down and if the thing isn't buggy, it may be worth the switch. I really don't think any one wireless system is that much better than the other.
Comments
Now, before anyone pops up with 'I want an open...' we can drop that idea right now.... as much as we'd all like an 'open phone' neither the cell phone makers nor the cell service providers want us to have it so it ain't gonna happen - we live in a world where the companies are exerting more and more control over our very lives and it's only getting worse...
- They control how/where we watch moves (region code crap)
- They control the ability to record time-shift shows (broadcast flag)
- They control the level of quality you get to see and/or the ability to see the content at all when watching a new hidef dvd - used as generic term (via HDCP or whatever its called)
- They control how we use almost every aspect of using the cell phone and have the ability to charge monthly fees for features that were built into the phone and don't need any 'support' from the provider.
The list goes on and on.... Like I said it's only going to get worse as more companies / industries realize they too can impose a MUCH tighter grip on its customers and at the same time profit more from doing so...
If we 'the citizens of the WORLD' don't put a stop to it soon it'll snowball.
Dave
Dave - I fully agree with your assessment of what the mobile phone cartel companies (mostly) want to do as far as draconian assertion of control of the user experience. And Verizon Wireless is legendary for being the worst of the lot in this regard (including having lost a class-action suit against it for having crippled the BlueTooth capabilities of that one Motorola phone (the 715?)).
But I think the genie is out of the bottle as far as their potential to succeed in this: They (the carriers/operators) are in a race to provide ever more capable phones, and ever more powerful data capabilities ... but the very process of doing so subverts their desires, as "more powerful" for computing type devices--including mobile phones--means (in part) being programmable. And the more programmable the device, with ever better data connectivity, the more control is inevitably relinquished to the end users. The carriers don't want it to mean this ... they fervently work to impede it meaning this, but they are fighting a losing battle.
As for the phone manufacturers, I'm not so sure that they have quite the same anti-end-user agenda. I think that (in general) they want to differentiate their phones by how cool & useful the end users find them to be. (Most of those manufactures clearly don't really know how to do that, but that's a different problem.
So what's the saving grace? Several things ... the ongoing advance of the capabilities of mobile phones qua computers, the ongoing advance of data connectivity, ... and competition (hi, Adam Smith!
So be hopeful ... and vote with your dollars, for both equipment and services, that keep advancing the trends in the favor of us, the end users!
What would you call it then?
If I were to call it anything else it would be an iPod without a screen a cludgy, limited function remote. And in the case of a remote, having something that small is not a bonus. It's an annoyance when it becomes lost to ever find again.
Did you listen to the keynote? It is a wireless way of displaying media on a HD TV. It synchs like an iPod so it will be instantly usable by almost everyone and it will store lots of music and movies AND allows son Johnny's MacBook and daughter Jenny's MacBookPro to stream content from the sofa as well.
All remotes are lost roughly at the same rate regardless of size. Smaller ones more easily fall into smaller places, but people take more care of them.
I get your point, but it's sort of planned obsolesence. I have a 5G iPod and it might be obsolete tomorrow but I don't know that ahead of time. 720p has already been superceded by something superior so why would Apple pick 720p when there was a better standard already available? That's what annoys me about it. I already know it's not the best, and I can expect in a year to be replacing it with AppleTV that actually handles 1080p. It's pretty much the same reason others are annoyed that the AppleTV and new Airport Extreme don't have gigabit ethernet ports.
Does anyone know the market for 720p vs. 1080p TV's.
That's my fear is that Apple will hold off on the true video iPod to ensure it doesn't affect iPhone sales. I would be all over this phone if it had a larger storage capacity. As it is, I'd end up carrying the iPhone and my 5G iPod to have all my music and video. Hardly the solution that Apple was going for.
The iPhone is a communication device that can play songs and movies. IT IS NOT AN iPOD!!! It will never (in the next 4 years anyway) hold 10,000 songs, because it isn't meant to!!! It has its own section on the Apple website. In less than 2 years it will have its own department within Apple, like the iPod. The iPod with clickwheel will be around for awhile because of exactly what you are describing. Apple would love for you to own an iPhone and a 5G iPod!!!
The whole point of doing the iPhone now was to get that UI and the Multi-touch technology out there and patented in a device in a market (mobile phones) that is big enough to make Apple money while it works of Tablets and other devices that can use the Multi-touch tech even more. This is just the beginning. That is also why they added a version of OSX on to the thing. Why the overkill? Sure for all of the security and power management and all, but really for the future devices that will need a new GUI and OS. Just like FrontRow, Apple is designing new OSX based UI's that it will be evolving right along side the Mac for the next 30 years. And you're worried about one phone coming out in June with one carrier?!?!?!
Did you listen to the keynote? It is a wireless way of displaying media on a HD TV. It synchs like an iPod so it will be instantly usable by almost everyone and it will store lots of music and movies AND allows son Johnny's MacBook and daughter Jenny's MacBookPro to stream content from the sofa as well.
All remotes are lost roughly at the same rate regardless of size. Smaller ones more easily fall into smaller places, but people take more care of them.
Does anyone know the market for 720p vs. 1080p TV's.
The iPhone is a communication device that can play songs and movies. IT IS NOT AN iPOD!!! It will never (in the next 4 years anyway) hold 10,000 songs, because it isn't meant to!!! It has its own section on the Apple website. In less than 2 years it will have its own department within Apple, like the iPod. The iPod with clickwheel will be around for awhile because of exactly what you are describing. Apple would love for you to own an iPhone and a 5G iPod!!!
The whole point of doing the iPhone now was to get that UI and the Multi-touch technology out there and patented in a device in a market (mobile phones) that is big enough to make Apple money while it works of Tablets and other devices that can use the Multi-touch tech even more. This is just the beginning. That is also why they added a version of OSX on to the thing. Why the overkill? Sure for all of the security and power management and all, but really for the future devices that will need a new GUI and OS. Just like FrontRow, Apple is designing new OSX based UI's that it will be evolving right along side the Mac for the next 30 years. And you're worried about one phone coming out in June with one carrier?!?!?!
The market for HD TV's in the US is pretty miniscule to begin with. And I don't doubt that the market for 1080p would probably fall close to 0%. But that wasn't my point. It's already knowing there IS something better out there, knowing that if Apple wants to continue in the media device market it WILL release an updated version that handles 1080p but knowing they decided to make this device already underpowered for TODAY's current best quality video solution.
And regardless of it's size, the Apple Remote is bare bones at best. 6 buttons doesn't provide many functions. Want to mute the sound? Keep hitting the volume down button until it's muted, no one button choice that is STANDARD on pretty much every remote. Granted, a mute option is not standard on ANY current Apple product but still.
As for your last point, about the iPhone not being an iPod maybe you should go visit Apple's official iPhone website. It pretty clearly states the iPhone IS an iPod.
Here's the link: http://www.apple.com/iphone/ipod/
So basically the latest iPod comes bundled with a 2-year commitment. I don't really care what network it's on, but the fact that this is the only way to get the latest iPod.
I'm sure Apple is happy for me to buy an iPhone and an iPod but if they really want to support that they need to drop the BS about the iPhone being the convergence device they're hyping it as. It doesn't fit my needs as an iPod, one of Apple's own key selling points for the device.
And yes I am only concerned about one product coming out in June. As a consumer, I' don't give a flying fart about Apple's long term plans for the multi-touch technology. According to your argument, the iPhone is basically a $500/600 beta test program to see how it works in the real world. And there is and never was anything revolutionary about Front Row; it's basically a prettier version of the iPod interface. Do I want Apple to be successful: Yes. Do I want them to succeed at my expense: No.
Granted, a mute option is not standard on ANY current Apple product
Except for all their computers.
Except for all their computers.
Sorry, you're right. I forgot about the mute button on the keyboard. I was thinking about in the software. The master volume control doesn't contain a mute option except to move the volume all the way down at which point it indicates being muted. Having spent many years in a Windows world, I'm sort of accustomed to the check box by the volume slider to immediately mute it. I don't think iTunes has a mute option either.
And regardless of it's size, the Apple Remote is bare bones at best. 6 buttons doesn't provide many functions. Want to mute the sound? Keep hitting the volume down button until it's muted, no one button choice that is STANDARD on pretty much every remote. Granted, a mute option is not standard on ANY current Apple product but still.
I agree with you that the remote could use a few more buttons. It would be good to be able to hit the volume down button twice quickly to move it to mute. In general I like Apple's view to simplify the hardware and have the software get smarter.
As for your last point, about the iPhone not being an iPod maybe you should go visit Apple's official iPhone website. It pretty clearly states the iPhone IS an iPod.
Here's the link: http://www.apple.com/iphone/ipod/
So basically the latest iPod comes bundled with a 2-year commitment. I don't really care what network it's on, but the fact that this is the only way to get the latest iPod.
It is a new device, an iPod, a phone and a web communication device. But that is the way Jobs framed the question to show people how the phone will compare with other smart phones. But it is not an iPod! It is a nano in a phone form. If it were an iPod, it would be under the iPod tab on the website. I'd like to see the internal org chart for Apple to see exactly who is working on this - just the iPod group or a consortium of folks from many departments. Again I bet it will be its own subsection of Apple soon enough.
I'm sure Apple is happy for me to buy an iPhone and an iPod but if they really want to support that they need to drop the BS about the iPhone being the convergence device they're hyping it as. It doesn't fit my needs as an iPod, one of Apple's own key selling points for the device.
I think you are missing the point. It has iPod Nano functionality, but it is not an iPod. The iPhone is a communication device that also converges mp3 playing. Its killer functions is to optimize each function by allowing the keyboard to change as needed for each function. By definition and converging device does not have to make the iPod that you have obsolete. You may need all of your music together in one place, but you don't need all of that on a phone since you can't listen to it all. Jobs said that many phones do have some songs, but that (just like the little cameras) most people stop using them after the first month. I believe he is betting that 8 gigs of music, podcasts, photos, etc. are what most people want with them at any one time - and the statistics bear that out with the Nano. So as a converging device, it works, it just isn't going to replace a REAL iPOD. It replaces the iPOD NANO. Does this make sense?
And yes I am only concerned about one product coming out in June. As a consumer, I' don't give a flying fart about Apple's long term plans for the multi-touch technology. According to your argument, the iPhone is basically a $500/600 beta test program to see how it works in the real world. And there is and never was anything revolutionary about Front Row; it's basically a prettier version of the iPod interface. Do I want Apple to be successful: Yes. Do I want them to succeed at my expense: No.
I certainly agree that you shouldn't foot the bill for version one tech. That's what early adopters do and will do just fine in June. You can thank them later while you keep your own phone and iPod and wait for the right price/functionality mix for you.
You can wait until 2008, like me to see what devices work well for me when my Verizon contract ends. I may still stay with Verizon though if the iPhone isn't useful enough or still too expensive. However the Verizon V-cast stuff does not interest me either, so if Apple can get the price down and if the thing isn't buggy, it may be worth the switch. I really don't think any one wireless system is that much better than the other.