Agreed, nothing beats Apple's iPhone's interface. Still I find the inclusion of free, no-commercial internet radio on the UpStage quite alluring, and that is not a feature currently on offer with the iPhone, as far as I can tell.
And if any manufacturer ever gets it together enough to incorporate decent speech-recognition technology into a mobile device, then the physical interface will become much less important for entering data, be it for dialing calls or shopping on iTunes or where ever.
Watch out for Palm's next product (to be announced around May)...
Jeff Hawkins, the inventor of the Palm Treo, has been working on a secret product which can be THE threat to the iPhone. They have been working closely of late with Sprint to establish a business related to over-the-air wireless internet and downloads. I believe this product will feature an updated Palm OS interface (still the most simple user-friendly OS ever, though it hasnt been updated for years), phone-wifi capabilities, and i think will take advantage of this over-the-air music downloads from Sprint.
Imagine a Treo, widescreen, with WiFi (theres even talks of WiMAX), Palm OS2, with an iTunes-like application built in, where you can download songs over this Sprint Music Library... sounds like an Awesome iPhone competitor to me.
And Palm has a given plus over OSX... third-part applications! TONS of them! both for personal and business enterprises.
Watch out for Palm's next product (to be announced around May)...
Jeff Hawkins, the inventor of the Palm Treo, has been working on a secret product which can be THE threat to the iPhone. They have been working closely of late with Sprint to establish a business related to over-the-air wireless internet and downloads. I believe this product will feature an updated Palm OS interface (still the most simple user-friendly OS ever, though it hasnt been updated for years), phone-wifi capabilities, and i think will take advantage of this over-the-air music downloads from Sprint.
Imagine a Treo, widescreen, with WiFi (theres even talks of WiMAX), Palm OS2, with an iTunes-like application built in, where you can download songs over this Sprint Music Library... sounds like an Awesome iPhone competitor to me.
And Palm has a given plus over OSX... third-part applications! TONS of them! both for personal and business enterprises.
*Let's loose a tremendous Yawn*
Imagine Palm's outdated OS, on top of Linux, on a phone that looks like the iPhone, does WiFi too! or components for a network that doesn't exist yet. Palm OS2 with a "Music Playing" application that is nothing like the iTunes I know and love, where I can download songs over this Sprint Music Library while waiting in line at Safeway and as an added bonus, manage my Music Library on an SD Card and a Number Pad! RIP iPhone....
They still do not get it, they think Apple is competing on price, sooner or later they will figure out it is all about the end user experience.
Ok so you can download over the air, but how do you manage your music and all your content, can you easily move things between your phone and computer or your stereo system or play the music over your car stereo and do it all work without you having to think about.
It looks like another failed product... and Sprint think that if people have their music on the phone they would be less likely to change service providers.
yeah, well how is apple product any easier when you have to move the music from the computer to the device?. Think about this for a second.. why do you buy a phone that can play music?.. to play music on the phone!!!.. not the computer!!! As to ease of moving music on the computer.. i have a SD card.. it's as easy as plugging the sd card into a reader and copying the music to my computer.. heck, it's as easy as moving the music through a bluetooth connection but that begs the question of why?.. if i wanted music on my computer, why would i buy it through a phone?. Conversely, if i wanted music on my phone, why would i buy it through a computer ( a question apple apparently failed to ask themself).
The iPhone as-is is not suitable for downloading media. UTMS isn't even suitable, much less GPRS. However, I'm not convinced that people have been running to download songs on their phones, nor do I believe that at 0.99 this will change much of anything.
Don't be an ass.. of course 99 cents changes thing.. do you think sprint has zero customers?.. or customers who do not buy their music?.. of course not!!.. it makes a difference cause those customers can get more music for their money and other sprint customers who were thinking about it but thought the price was too high will give it a try.. just cause you are an apple fanboy does not mean you have to give yourself a lobotomy. Will it change anything.. duh, yes. Will it compete effectively with apple offerings.. that's another story. There is still room for growth in this market.. sprint growing does not imply apple shrinking.
But you're forgetting that the Upstage (and Prada, and whatever else) are only 'iPhone killers' in the same way that the Creative Zen, Toshiba Gigabeat, and Zune were 'iPod killers'... i.e., not at all. The Upstage is a decent try, but that's about all. Apple isn't exactly losing sleep.
Far as Apple announcing the iPhone back in January, that was the way to go. They completely overshadowed all of CES and generated tremendous advance hype and curiousity, and if they'd waited, well, they would've been scooped anyway when time came to submit the iPhone for FCC approval (something Apple has to do far in advance of the iPhone actually shipping).
Apple made the right call (pardon the pun), and it's not like the copycats can really slap together something in five months (or even fifteen months) that's going to equal or exceed the iPhone.
Look at it this way... the iPod copycats have had over FIVE YEARS to come up with something that equals or exceeds the iPod, and it just hasn't happened, because they don't have Apple's design skills, corporate DNA, or patents. Their world is all about 'good enough', which consistently prevents them from equaling the iPod.
iPhone is pretty much the same dealio. Why? Because the major phone makers weren't thinking, like Apple, that the cell phone was basically 'broken' and needed to be rethought... they thought the status quo in cell phone design and UI was fine and they were only too happy to keep selling customers variations on the same old, same old.
Thus, the iPhone caught them more or less flat-footed, and its going to take them a long time to catch up, if they ever do. They basically have to hope that Apple screws up. A lot. \
.
Apple isn't losing sleep?.. they have ZERO market share as of now. You are funny!!!. Hmm dude, any move a current cell provider makes that persuades more and more people not to wait for the apple iphone should worry apple. They are not the dominant players in this market, they are the upstart or did that little fact escape you?.
Don't be an ass.. of course 99 cents changes thing.. do you think sprint has zero customers?.. or customers who do not buy their music?.. of course not!!.. it makes a difference cause those customers can get more music for their money and other sprint customers who were thinking about it but thought the price was too high will give it a try.. just cause you are an apple fanboy does not mean you have to give yourself a lobotomy. Will it change anything.. duh, yes. Will it compete effectively with apple offerings.. that's another story. There is still room for growth in this market.. sprint growing does not imply apple shrinking.
While your tone sucks, your basic observation is correct. Before, at $2.49 a song, Sprint's OTA ('over-the-air') download service was a bad joke that had no chance of succeeding.
Now that they've changed over to the 'iTunes' pricepoint of 99 cents, they essentially get a 'do-over'. Still, I'd agree with the folks who say that the OTA download market isn't exactly setting the world on fire. Yes, there's a lot of people who use cellphones, but you need more than just cellphone users, you need cellphone users who have music cellphones, who have 3G phones, who live in an area well-served by 3G, and who are into OTA downloads. It may all come together, but it's gonna take longer than Sprint or almost anyone else figured. \
They still do not get it, they think Apple is competing on price, sooner or later they will figure out it is all about the end user experience.
Ok so you can download over the air, but how do you manage your music and all your content, can you easily move things between your phone and computer or your stereo system or play the music over your car stereo and do it all work without you having to think about.
It looks like another failed product... and Sprint think that if people have their music on the phone they would be less likely to change service providers.
Price is vital, man. Apple is going to sell a 600 dollar phone, which will probably last for 2 years, if Apple holds on to their iPod business model of disposable expensive gadgets to maximize profits. Does the iPhone have a replaceable battery???
The great thing about the Samsung idea is that the phone isn't much more expensive than a regular mobile, and that you can download songs without your computer - kind of the point of a mobile phone...
This type of product, with the same pricing as iTunes, but a quarter the cost of iPhone , and most likely a much longer life since the battery and memory is replaceable will appeal to a great many people.
Also - the memory card should be hot-swappable, since it is in most cameras and existing telephones.
For me personally, I like the idea of not having to carry around both an iPod and a phone, but the iPhone is ridiculously expensive, and I don't want the big screen and overly robust OS sucking the (non-replaceable) battery life of my phone. Also, I still think dialing numbers and typing sms's with the touch screen will be totally annoying. Right now I can do it by feel and not look at the phone, which is handy if I'm on the go (again, the point of a mobile phone). Don't even get me started about switching service providers.
I think the majority of the people buying the iPhone will be existing Apple users who go beyond the "average user" category, and like their perceived "status" of having lots of apple toys. Everyone that buys it will also own a MacBook and at least one (probably more) iPods. It's a certain kind of people, sort of super-capitalist toy mongers who at the same time rant about how stupid people with other brands of toys are.
The Samsung phone will appeal to a broader spectrum, i think, AND open up online music/MP3s to a huge number of people who don't or can't or just haven't tried downloading music from the internet (there is a reason that ringtones currently outsell most pop songs - Billboard removed ringtones from the standard top-ten because it got embarrassing to have crazy frog at the top of the charts, in a similar way the New York Times created the "children's top 10" to get Harry Potter out of the simultaneous top 3 bestsellers)...
Blue tooth and probably some sort of cable out will allow connection to stereo system and computer, but I don't think that's the point of the device so much. How many people are actually plugging their iPods nanos into their home stereo (and who the hell will plug their iPhone into their stereo....?)
Apple isn't losing sleep?.. they have ZERO market share as of now. You are funny!!!.
Thanks for the kind words.
Honestly though, I do know what I'm saying here. Apple may be a newcomer to the market, but no one reasonable disputes that their product is very well-thought out and a major threat to the established players in the market at the high-end (though we can expect lower-priced iPhones to come out later). I know people who work at Motorola, in their cellphone division. They are losing sleep, they admit. Apple, not so much.
Quote:
Hmm dude, any move a current cell provider makes that persuades more and more people not to wait for the apple iphone should worry apple.
Well, that's exactly the problem. The established cellphone makers are tossing out 'iPhone killers' that aren't persuading most people not to wait for the iPhone:
And it's not even out for another three months. 80
Quote:
They are not the dominant players in this market, they are the upstart or did that little fact escape you?.
LOL, I'm well aware of who the dominant players are... Nokia, Moto, Samsung, LG, etc. So? Their marketshare isn't a defense against the iPhone. None of them really have anything that's going to make the majority of people waiting for the iPhone go, "Oh, FORGET the iPhone, THAT looks much better!!" And therein lies the problem for the established makers.
Apple, newcomer or not, will move in and take a chunk of the high-end market away from them. The established makers will respond in their usual scattershot way, and may eventually come up with something that's a decent 'second best', playing 'Zune to Apple's iPod', as it were. Then Apple will start moving into the midrange phone market, and they'll take a chunk of that too.
No, Apple will not take over the entire industry... they'd never be interested in the low-end, and the established makers economies of scale, established brand, and carrier relationships do count for something. But Apple will no doubt be one of the players in the industry from here on out, and all because the established phone makers couldn't figure out how broken high-end cellphones really were. \
Price is vital, man. Apple is going to sell a 600 dollar phone, which will probably last for 2 years, if Apple holds on to their iPod business model of disposable expensive gadgets to maximize profits. Does the iPhone have a replaceable battery???
...
This type of product, with the same pricing as iTunes, but a quarter the cost of iPhone , and most likely a much longer life since the battery and memory is replaceable will appeal to a great many people.
iPod batteries can be replaced, so I can imagine that the same is true for the iPhone as well. It's not as easy as I would like but it can be done. It takes me a few minutes to be able to pop the cover of the standard iPod and 1st gen nano. Anyone that's throwing away their iPod because the battery is dead is being wasteful. If they can't do it themselves, then there are inexpensive services that will do the job, or Apple will trade it out for $59.
iPod batteries can be replaced, so I can imagine that the same is true for the iPhone as well. It's not as easy as I would like but it can be done. It takes me a few minutes to be able to pop the cover of the standard iPod and 1st gen nano. Anyone that's throwing away their iPod because the battery is dead is being wasteful. If they can't do it themselves, then there are inexpensive services that will do the job, or Apple will trade it out for $59.
$60 (plus shipping?) for a new battery (and you can't talk on the phone for a few days while it's being fixed). Otherwise you go to an independent service and pay $50 (and lose all future support for the product), or do it yourself, and hopefully not screw up (and go to the trouble of finding a new battery, again via unofficial means... Those aren't features I'd like in a 600 dollar phone.
It's ridiculous, really, how much Apple has limited the consumer's experience this way with the iPod, and now the phone, but it's what keeps the product selling, I guess. If it lasted twice as long, there'd be half as many sales. The problem with the phone is that every single other model on the market has an easily replaced battery that costs around 15-20 bucks, less if you go third party.
It's crazy that my 4 year old Ericsson phone's battery still holds a charge for a good 3 days, and in that time, i've had 2 iPods die... I don't think many phone customers will put up with that.
Again, I think this is a product apple is basically selling to existing apple devotees, where the brand is paramount. They could make an "iWristwatch" or "iCar" or "iCoffeeMachine" and the same people would buy it. Call it a tax on the faithful.
Well, that's exactly the problem. The established cellphone makers are tossing out 'iPhone killers' that aren't persuading most people not to wait for the iPhone:
And it's not even out for another three months. 80
.
How is this stat proof of anything?. maybe they would have had more inquiries if not for some compelling choices?.. perhaps some of those people who inquired may decide to get another phone?... the stat above is useless. it's only usefullness is to demonstrate potential market share, it does not indicate how compelling the current phone companies offerings are.
How is this stat proof of anything?. maybe they would have had more inquiries if not for some compelling choices?.. perhaps some of those people who inquired may decide to get another phone?... the stat above is useless. it's only usefullness is to demonstrate potential market share, it does not indicate how compelling the current phone companies offerings are.
Hee hee hee. Wait 3 months wnurse, and prepare to weep.
Honestly though, I do know what I'm saying here. Apple may be a newcomer to the market, but no one reasonable disputes that their product is very well-thought out and a major threat to the established players in the market at the high-end (though we can expect lower-priced iPhones to come out later). I know people who work at Motorola, in their cellphone division. They are losing sleep, they admit. Apple, not so much.
Well, that's exactly the problem. The established cellphone makers are tossing out 'iPhone killers' that aren't persuading most people not to wait for the iPhone:
And it's not even out for another three months. 80
LOL, I'm well aware of who the dominant players are... Nokia, Moto, Samsung, LG, etc. So? Their marketshare isn't a defense against the iPhone. None of them really have anything that's going to make the majority of people waiting for the iPhone go, "Oh, FORGET the iPhone, THAT looks much better!!" And therein lies the problem for the established makers.
Apple, newcomer or not, will move in and take a chunk of the high-end market away from them. The established makers will respond in their usual scattershot way, and may eventually come up with something that's a decent 'second best', playing 'Zune to Apple's iPod', as it were. Then Apple will start moving into the midrange phone market, and they'll take a chunk of that too.
No, Apple will not take over the entire industry... they'd never be interested in the low-end, and the established makers economies of scale, established brand, and carrier relationships do count for something. But Apple will no doubt be one of the players in the industry from here on out, and all because the established phone makers couldn't figure out how broken high-end cellphones really were. \
.
That would be the SanDisk Sansa, not the Zune. Not even close.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass
$60 (plus shipping?) for a new battery (and you can't talk on the phone for a few days while it's being fixed). Otherwise you go to an independent service and pay $50 (and lose all future support for the product), or do it yourself, and hopefully not screw up (and go to the trouble of finding a new battery, again via unofficial means... Those aren't features I'd like in a 600 dollar phone.
It's ridiculous, really, how much Apple has limited the consumer's experience this way with the iPod, and now the phone, but it's what keeps the product selling, I guess. If it lasted twice as long, there'd be half as many sales. The problem with the phone is that every single other model on the market has an easily replaced battery that costs around 15-20 bucks, less if you go third party.
It's crazy that my 4 year old Ericsson phone's battery still holds a charge for a good 3 days, and in that time, i've had 2 iPods die... I don't think many phone customers will put up with that.
Again, I think this is a product apple is basically selling to existing apple devotees, where the brand is paramount. They could make an "iWristwatch" or "iCar" or "iCoffeeMachine" and the same people would buy it. Call it a tax on the faithful.
Tell that to my Nuclear powered Shuffle. It lasted from a Sunday to a Friday on it's first charge. It crapped out in Homeroom on that Friday because I forgot what day of the week it was and how long it went without a charge.
It's ridiculous, really, how much Apple has limited the consumer's experience this way with the iPod, and now the phone, but it's what keeps the product selling, I guess. If it lasted twice as long, there'd be half as many sales. The problem with the phone is that every single other model on the market has an easily replaced battery that costs around 15-20 bucks, less if you go third party.
I've owned more portable electronic devices than I can remember and I have yet to find reason to replace a factory installed rechargeable battery. The only time I've ever removed a battery was to add/remove a SIM card below the battery or reset a crappy cellphone OS.
Don't be an ass.. of course 99 cents changes thing.. do you think sprint has zero customers?.. or customers who do not buy their music?.. of course not!!.. it makes a difference cause those customers can get more music for their money and other sprint customers who were thinking about it but thought the price was too high will give it a try.. just cause you are an apple fanboy does not mean you have to give yourself a lobotomy. Will it change anything.. duh, yes. Will it compete effectively with apple offerings.. that's another story. There is still room for growth in this market.. sprint growing does not imply apple shrinking.
An ass?
I am a sprint customer, and perhaps you didn't read the post 35 or whatever of this thread where I said I think I'm going to get one of these phones. If I were an Apple fanboy, I would ditch the unbeatable Sprint service and switch to the abysmal Cingular service just to get an iPhone. That's not happening.
I don't know who you are, but I don't think you have much of a clue. At $0.99, sprint will not be making a profit. This is a loss leader, and a hopeful one at that -- they're trying to drive UpStage sales and thus Sprint subscriptions. A lot of people have tried, and everyone who tries to beat the iPod falls flat on their faces. A MicroSD phone isn't going to beat the iPod, or much less the iPhone as a device for playing music. enough said. Will downloadable music make the difference? Honestly, I don't think so. The most compelling feature of this phone is the digital radio that comes with the power-vision plan. Not only is it cool, but it's something that Sprint's world-beating 3G network can do, and Cingular's won't be able to do for five years, optimistically. I'm just not convinced that people want to buy a lot of music on their phones.
That would be the SanDisk Sansa, not the Zune. Not even close.
We're talking more mindshare than marketshare. I think most people are aware of how the Zune has fared in the market:
Quote:
Tell that to my Nuclear powered Shuffle. It lasted from a Sunday to a Friday on it's first charge. It crapped out in Homeroom on that Friday because I forgot what day of the week it was and how long it went without a charge.
I think he's referring more to the fact that Li-ion batteries eventually wear down... after 2 years or about 300 discharge cycles, whichever comes first. Not how good a brand-new iPod's batt is.
Okay, first and foremost, the iPhone will not do anything to the normal, just a phone business. Some people just like basic phones, others just want phones with music -- and others want the whole sha-bang. And thats where the iPhone will win the day. The days of seeing Treo's, Moto Q's, ect selling are almost over. However, them choosing Cingular is a bummer -- i hate that company (but not as much as t-mobile).
But, I do suspect a "iPhone Nano" is going to happen -- it's just a given. When that happens, then Apple will digg into the "normal phone market".
Also, in defense for the Upstage -- it might be joked to be a "iPhone Killer", but as all of you know, it's not. I think the big "iPhone Killer" is in the music store. And it is the exact same price as the Apple Store now -- so you know they are looking at Apple. Also, http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/samsung_upstage/ --> you actually see it in action (even the texting) -- and I gatta say it doesn't look half bad. You might have to flip a lot, but then again, depending on the person, it might not be annoying. And the thing I love most about is the wallet -- it protects the phone and extends the battery life. How cool is that? And it's free with the phone, so anyone complaining about battery life can suck it up....because not using the wallet would be stupid (this way no accidental calls, no breaking the screen because you slammed your phone against something in your wallet...and no scratches on your phone. And, since it's small, it will fit in your pocket with ease.
Can you say the iPhone will fit in your pocket easily? But remember, before you start bashing me, I am an Apple fan -- love my mac and I swear by it. But the iPhone at it's present stage doesn't present a threat to people who just want a phone with a camera, and maybe a couple of added features. Not everyone wants/needs/has money for a computer in a phone, know what I mean *cough* college students.
Comments
And if any manufacturer ever gets it together enough to incorporate decent speech-recognition technology into a mobile device, then the physical interface will become much less important for entering data, be it for dialing calls or shopping on iTunes or where ever.
Jeff Hawkins, the inventor of the Palm Treo, has been working on a secret product which can be THE threat to the iPhone. They have been working closely of late with Sprint to establish a business related to over-the-air wireless internet and downloads. I believe this product will feature an updated Palm OS interface (still the most simple user-friendly OS ever, though it hasnt been updated for years), phone-wifi capabilities, and i think will take advantage of this over-the-air music downloads from Sprint.
Imagine a Treo, widescreen, with WiFi (theres even talks of WiMAX), Palm OS2, with an iTunes-like application built in, where you can download songs over this Sprint Music Library... sounds like an Awesome iPhone competitor to me.
And Palm has a given plus over OSX... third-part applications! TONS of them! both for personal and business enterprises.
Watch out for Palm's next product (to be announced around May)...
Jeff Hawkins, the inventor of the Palm Treo, has been working on a secret product which can be THE threat to the iPhone. They have been working closely of late with Sprint to establish a business related to over-the-air wireless internet and downloads. I believe this product will feature an updated Palm OS interface (still the most simple user-friendly OS ever, though it hasnt been updated for years), phone-wifi capabilities, and i think will take advantage of this over-the-air music downloads from Sprint.
Imagine a Treo, widescreen, with WiFi (theres even talks of WiMAX), Palm OS2, with an iTunes-like application built in, where you can download songs over this Sprint Music Library... sounds like an Awesome iPhone competitor to me.
And Palm has a given plus over OSX... third-part applications! TONS of them! both for personal and business enterprises.
*Let's loose a tremendous Yawn*
Imagine Palm's outdated OS, on top of Linux, on a phone that looks like the iPhone, does WiFi too! or components for a network that doesn't exist yet. Palm OS2 with a "Music Playing" application that is nothing like the iTunes I know and love, where I can download songs over this Sprint Music Library while waiting in line at Safeway and as an added bonus, manage my Music Library on an SD Card and a Number Pad! RIP iPhone....
Sebastian
They still do not get it, they think Apple is competing on price, sooner or later they will figure out it is all about the end user experience.
Ok so you can download over the air, but how do you manage your music and all your content, can you easily move things between your phone and computer or your stereo system or play the music over your car stereo and do it all work without you having to think about.
It looks like another failed product... and Sprint think that if people have their music on the phone they would be less likely to change service providers.
yeah, well how is apple product any easier when you have to move the music from the computer to the device?. Think about this for a second.. why do you buy a phone that can play music?.. to play music on the phone!!!.. not the computer!!! As to ease of moving music on the computer.. i have a SD card.. it's as easy as plugging the sd card into a reader and copying the music to my computer.. heck, it's as easy as moving the music through a bluetooth connection but that begs the question of why?.. if i wanted music on my computer, why would i buy it through a phone?. Conversely, if i wanted music on my phone, why would i buy it through a computer ( a question apple apparently failed to ask themself).
The iPhone as-is is not suitable for downloading media. UTMS isn't even suitable, much less GPRS. However, I'm not convinced that people have been running to download songs on their phones, nor do I believe that at 0.99 this will change much of anything.
Don't be an ass.. of course 99 cents changes thing.. do you think sprint has zero customers?.. or customers who do not buy their music?.. of course not!!.. it makes a difference cause those customers can get more music for their money and other sprint customers who were thinking about it but thought the price was too high will give it a try.. just cause you are an apple fanboy does not mean you have to give yourself a lobotomy. Will it change anything.. duh, yes. Will it compete effectively with apple offerings.. that's another story. There is still room for growth in this market.. sprint growing does not imply apple shrinking.
But you're forgetting that the Upstage (and Prada, and whatever else) are only 'iPhone killers' in the same way that the Creative Zen, Toshiba Gigabeat, and Zune were 'iPod killers'... i.e., not at all. The Upstage is a decent try, but that's about all. Apple isn't exactly losing sleep.
Far as Apple announcing the iPhone back in January, that was the way to go. They completely overshadowed all of CES and generated tremendous advance hype and curiousity, and if they'd waited, well, they would've been scooped anyway when time came to submit the iPhone for FCC approval (something Apple has to do far in advance of the iPhone actually shipping).
Apple made the right call (pardon the pun), and it's not like the copycats can really slap together something in five months (or even fifteen months) that's going to equal or exceed the iPhone.
Look at it this way... the iPod copycats have had over FIVE YEARS to come up with something that equals or exceeds the iPod, and it just hasn't happened, because they don't have Apple's design skills, corporate DNA, or patents. Their world is all about 'good enough', which consistently prevents them from equaling the iPod.
iPhone is pretty much the same dealio. Why? Because the major phone makers weren't thinking, like Apple, that the cell phone was basically 'broken' and needed to be rethought... they thought the status quo in cell phone design and UI was fine and they were only too happy to keep selling customers variations on the same old, same old.
Thus, the iPhone caught them more or less flat-footed, and its going to take them a long time to catch up, if they ever do. They basically have to hope that Apple screws up. A lot.
.
Apple isn't losing sleep?.. they have ZERO market share as of now. You are funny!!!. Hmm dude, any move a current cell provider makes that persuades more and more people not to wait for the apple iphone should worry apple. They are not the dominant players in this market, they are the upstart or did that little fact escape you?.
Don't be an ass.. of course 99 cents changes thing.. do you think sprint has zero customers?.. or customers who do not buy their music?.. of course not!!.. it makes a difference cause those customers can get more music for their money and other sprint customers who were thinking about it but thought the price was too high will give it a try.. just cause you are an apple fanboy does not mean you have to give yourself a lobotomy. Will it change anything.. duh, yes. Will it compete effectively with apple offerings.. that's another story. There is still room for growth in this market.. sprint growing does not imply apple shrinking.
While your tone sucks, your basic observation is correct. Before, at $2.49 a song, Sprint's OTA ('over-the-air') download service was a bad joke that had no chance of succeeding.
Now that they've changed over to the 'iTunes' pricepoint of 99 cents, they essentially get a 'do-over'. Still, I'd agree with the folks who say that the OTA download market isn't exactly setting the world on fire. Yes, there's a lot of people who use cellphones, but you need more than just cellphone users, you need cellphone users who have music cellphones, who have 3G phones, who live in an area well-served by 3G, and who are into OTA downloads. It may all come together, but it's gonna take longer than Sprint or almost anyone else figured.
.
They still do not get it, they think Apple is competing on price, sooner or later they will figure out it is all about the end user experience.
Ok so you can download over the air, but how do you manage your music and all your content, can you easily move things between your phone and computer or your stereo system or play the music over your car stereo and do it all work without you having to think about.
It looks like another failed product... and Sprint think that if people have their music on the phone they would be less likely to change service providers.
Price is vital, man. Apple is going to sell a 600 dollar phone, which will probably last for 2 years, if Apple holds on to their iPod business model of disposable expensive gadgets to maximize profits. Does the iPhone have a replaceable battery???
The great thing about the Samsung idea is that the phone isn't much more expensive than a regular mobile, and that you can download songs without your computer - kind of the point of a mobile phone...
This type of product, with the same pricing as iTunes, but a quarter the cost of iPhone , and most likely a much longer life since the battery and memory is replaceable will appeal to a great many people.
Also - the memory card should be hot-swappable, since it is in most cameras and existing telephones.
For me personally, I like the idea of not having to carry around both an iPod and a phone, but the iPhone is ridiculously expensive, and I don't want the big screen and overly robust OS sucking the (non-replaceable) battery life of my phone. Also, I still think dialing numbers and typing sms's with the touch screen will be totally annoying. Right now I can do it by feel and not look at the phone, which is handy if I'm on the go (again, the point of a mobile phone). Don't even get me started about switching service providers.
I think the majority of the people buying the iPhone will be existing Apple users who go beyond the "average user" category, and like their perceived "status" of having lots of apple toys. Everyone that buys it will also own a MacBook and at least one (probably more) iPods. It's a certain kind of people, sort of super-capitalist toy mongers who at the same time rant about how stupid people with other brands of toys are.
The Samsung phone will appeal to a broader spectrum, i think, AND open up online music/MP3s to a huge number of people who don't or can't or just haven't tried downloading music from the internet (there is a reason that ringtones currently outsell most pop songs - Billboard removed ringtones from the standard top-ten because it got embarrassing to have crazy frog at the top of the charts, in a similar way the New York Times created the "children's top 10" to get Harry Potter out of the simultaneous top 3 bestsellers)...
Blue tooth and probably some sort of cable out will allow connection to stereo system and computer, but I don't think that's the point of the device so much. How many people are actually plugging their iPods nanos into their home stereo (and who the hell will plug their iPhone into their stereo....?)
Apple isn't losing sleep?.. they have ZERO market share as of now. You are funny!!!.
Thanks for the kind words.
Honestly though, I do know what I'm saying here. Apple may be a newcomer to the market, but no one reasonable disputes that their product is very well-thought out and a major threat to the established players in the market at the high-end (though we can expect lower-priced iPhones to come out later). I know people who work at Motorola, in their cellphone division. They are losing sleep, they admit. Apple, not so much.
Hmm dude, any move a current cell provider makes that persuades more and more people not to wait for the apple iphone should worry apple.
Well, that's exactly the problem. The established cellphone makers are tossing out 'iPhone killers' that aren't persuading most people not to wait for the iPhone:
AT&T receives 1 million inquiries on Apple iPhone
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2607
And it's not even out for another three months. 80
They are not the dominant players in this market, they are the upstart or did that little fact escape you?.
LOL, I'm well aware of who the dominant players are... Nokia, Moto, Samsung, LG, etc. So? Their marketshare isn't a defense against the iPhone. None of them really have anything that's going to make the majority of people waiting for the iPhone go, "Oh, FORGET the iPhone, THAT looks much better!!"
Apple, newcomer or not, will move in and take a chunk of the high-end market away from them. The established makers will respond in their usual scattershot way, and may eventually come up with something that's a decent 'second best', playing 'Zune to Apple's iPod', as it were. Then Apple will start moving into the midrange phone market, and they'll take a chunk of that too.
No, Apple will not take over the entire industry... they'd never be interested in the low-end, and the established makers economies of scale, established brand, and carrier relationships do count for something. But Apple will no doubt be one of the players in the industry from here on out, and all because the established phone makers couldn't figure out how broken high-end cellphones really were.
.
Price is vital, man. Apple is going to sell a 600 dollar phone, which will probably last for 2 years, if Apple holds on to their iPod business model of disposable expensive gadgets to maximize profits. Does the iPhone have a replaceable battery???
...
This type of product, with the same pricing as iTunes, but a quarter the cost of iPhone , and most likely a much longer life since the battery and memory is replaceable will appeal to a great many people.
iPod batteries can be replaced, so I can imagine that the same is true for the iPhone as well. It's not as easy as I would like but it can be done. It takes me a few minutes to be able to pop the cover of the standard iPod and 1st gen nano. Anyone that's throwing away their iPod because the battery is dead is being wasteful. If they can't do it themselves, then there are inexpensive services that will do the job, or Apple will trade it out for $59.
iPod batteries can be replaced, so I can imagine that the same is true for the iPhone as well. It's not as easy as I would like but it can be done. It takes me a few minutes to be able to pop the cover of the standard iPod and 1st gen nano. Anyone that's throwing away their iPod because the battery is dead is being wasteful. If they can't do it themselves, then there are inexpensive services that will do the job, or Apple will trade it out for $59.
$60 (plus shipping?) for a new battery (and you can't talk on the phone for a few days while it's being fixed). Otherwise you go to an independent service and pay $50 (and lose all future support for the product), or do it yourself, and hopefully not screw up (and go to the trouble of finding a new battery, again via unofficial means... Those aren't features I'd like in a 600 dollar phone.
It's ridiculous, really, how much Apple has limited the consumer's experience this way with the iPod, and now the phone, but it's what keeps the product selling, I guess. If it lasted twice as long, there'd be half as many sales. The problem with the phone is that every single other model on the market has an easily replaced battery that costs around 15-20 bucks, less if you go third party.
It's crazy that my 4 year old Ericsson phone's battery still holds a charge for a good 3 days, and in that time, i've had 2 iPods die... I don't think many phone customers will put up with that.
Again, I think this is a product apple is basically selling to existing apple devotees, where the brand is paramount. They could make an "iWristwatch" or "iCar" or "iCoffeeMachine" and the same people would buy it. Call it a tax on the faithful.
IPhone Makes a Brief Appearance, and Again Apple Steals Show; FCC Chief Wouldn't Give It Back
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070327/cell_...ow_iphone.html
.
Thanks for the kind words.
Well, that's exactly the problem. The established cellphone makers are tossing out 'iPhone killers' that aren't persuading most people not to wait for the iPhone:
AT&T receives 1 million inquiries on Apple iPhone
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2607
And it's not even out for another three months. 80
.
How is this stat proof of anything?. maybe they would have had more inquiries if not for some compelling choices?.. perhaps some of those people who inquired may decide to get another phone?... the stat above is useless. it's only usefullness is to demonstrate potential market share, it does not indicate how compelling the current phone companies offerings are.
How is this stat proof of anything?. maybe they would have had more inquiries if not for some compelling choices?.. perhaps some of those people who inquired may decide to get another phone?... the stat above is useless. it's only usefullness is to demonstrate potential market share, it does not indicate how compelling the current phone companies offerings are.
Hee hee hee. Wait 3 months wnurse, and prepare to weep.
.
Thanks for the kind words.
Honestly though, I do know what I'm saying here. Apple may be a newcomer to the market, but no one reasonable disputes that their product is very well-thought out and a major threat to the established players in the market at the high-end (though we can expect lower-priced iPhones to come out later). I know people who work at Motorola, in their cellphone division. They are losing sleep, they admit. Apple, not so much.
Well, that's exactly the problem. The established cellphone makers are tossing out 'iPhone killers' that aren't persuading most people not to wait for the iPhone:
AT&T receives 1 million inquiries on Apple iPhone
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2607
And it's not even out for another three months. 80
LOL, I'm well aware of who the dominant players are... Nokia, Moto, Samsung, LG, etc. So? Their marketshare isn't a defense against the iPhone. None of them really have anything that's going to make the majority of people waiting for the iPhone go, "Oh, FORGET the iPhone, THAT looks much better!!"
Apple, newcomer or not, will move in and take a chunk of the high-end market away from them. The established makers will respond in their usual scattershot way, and may eventually come up with something that's a decent 'second best', playing 'Zune to Apple's iPod', as it were. Then Apple will start moving into the midrange phone market, and they'll take a chunk of that too.
No, Apple will not take over the entire industry... they'd never be interested in the low-end, and the established makers economies of scale, established brand, and carrier relationships do count for something. But Apple will no doubt be one of the players in the industry from here on out, and all because the established phone makers couldn't figure out how broken high-end cellphones really were.
.
That would be the SanDisk Sansa, not the Zune. Not even close.
$60 (plus shipping?) for a new battery (and you can't talk on the phone for a few days while it's being fixed). Otherwise you go to an independent service and pay $50 (and lose all future support for the product), or do it yourself, and hopefully not screw up (and go to the trouble of finding a new battery, again via unofficial means... Those aren't features I'd like in a 600 dollar phone.
It's ridiculous, really, how much Apple has limited the consumer's experience this way with the iPod, and now the phone, but it's what keeps the product selling, I guess. If it lasted twice as long, there'd be half as many sales. The problem with the phone is that every single other model on the market has an easily replaced battery that costs around 15-20 bucks, less if you go third party.
It's crazy that my 4 year old Ericsson phone's battery still holds a charge for a good 3 days, and in that time, i've had 2 iPods die... I don't think many phone customers will put up with that.
Again, I think this is a product apple is basically selling to existing apple devotees, where the brand is paramount. They could make an "iWristwatch" or "iCar" or "iCoffeeMachine" and the same people would buy it. Call it a tax on the faithful.
Tell that to my Nuclear powered Shuffle. It lasted from a Sunday to a Friday on it's first charge. It crapped out in Homeroom on that Friday because I forgot what day of the week it was and how long it went without a charge.
Sebastian
It's ridiculous, really, how much Apple has limited the consumer's experience this way with the iPod, and now the phone, but it's what keeps the product selling, I guess. If it lasted twice as long, there'd be half as many sales. The problem with the phone is that every single other model on the market has an easily replaced battery that costs around 15-20 bucks, less if you go third party.
I've owned more portable electronic devices than I can remember and I have yet to find reason to replace a factory installed rechargeable battery. The only time I've ever removed a battery was to add/remove a SIM card below the battery or reset a crappy cellphone OS.
I've owned more portable electronic devices than I can remember and I have yet to find reason to replace a factory installed rechargeable battery.
Huh? Li-ion batteries start going decidedly downhill after 2-3 years. If you keep a device long enough, you'll need to replace that batt.
I know my 1G iPod Mini has ridiculously short battery life compared to when it was new.
.
Don't be an ass.. of course 99 cents changes thing.. do you think sprint has zero customers?.. or customers who do not buy their music?.. of course not!!.. it makes a difference cause those customers can get more music for their money and other sprint customers who were thinking about it but thought the price was too high will give it a try.. just cause you are an apple fanboy does not mean you have to give yourself a lobotomy. Will it change anything.. duh, yes. Will it compete effectively with apple offerings.. that's another story. There is still room for growth in this market.. sprint growing does not imply apple shrinking.
An ass?
I am a sprint customer, and perhaps you didn't read the post 35 or whatever of this thread where I said I think I'm going to get one of these phones. If I were an Apple fanboy, I would ditch the unbeatable Sprint service and switch to the abysmal Cingular service just to get an iPhone. That's not happening.
I don't know who you are, but I don't think you have much of a clue. At $0.99, sprint will not be making a profit. This is a loss leader, and a hopeful one at that -- they're trying to drive UpStage sales and thus Sprint subscriptions. A lot of people have tried, and everyone who tries to beat the iPod falls flat on their faces. A MicroSD phone isn't going to beat the iPod, or much less the iPhone as a device for playing music. enough said. Will downloadable music make the difference? Honestly, I don't think so. The most compelling feature of this phone is the digital radio that comes with the power-vision plan. Not only is it cool, but it's something that Sprint's world-beating 3G network can do, and Cingular's won't be able to do for five years, optimistically. I'm just not convinced that people want to buy a lot of music on their phones.
That would be the SanDisk Sansa, not the Zune. Not even close.
We're talking more mindshare than marketshare. I think most people are aware of how the Zune has fared in the market:
Tell that to my Nuclear powered Shuffle. It lasted from a Sunday to a Friday on it's first charge. It crapped out in Homeroom on that Friday because I forgot what day of the week it was and how long it went without a charge.
I think he's referring more to the fact that Li-ion batteries eventually wear down... after 2 years or about 300 discharge cycles, whichever comes first. Not how good a brand-new iPod's batt is.
.
But, I do suspect a "iPhone Nano" is going to happen -- it's just a given. When that happens, then Apple will digg into the "normal phone market".
Also, in defense for the Upstage -- it might be joked to be a "iPhone Killer", but as all of you know, it's not. I think the big "iPhone Killer" is in the music store. And it is the exact same price as the Apple Store now -- so you know they are looking at Apple. Also, http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/samsung_upstage/ --> you actually see it in action (even the texting) -- and I gatta say it doesn't look half bad. You might have to flip a lot, but then again, depending on the person, it might not be annoying. And the thing I love most about is the wallet -- it protects the phone and extends the battery life. How cool is that? And it's free with the phone, so anyone complaining about battery life can suck it up....because not using the wallet would be stupid (this way no accidental calls, no breaking the screen because you slammed your phone against something in your wallet...and no scratches on your phone. And, since it's small, it will fit in your pocket with ease.
Can you say the iPhone will fit in your pocket easily? But remember, before you start bashing me, I am an Apple fan -- love my mac and I swear by it. But the iPhone at it's present stage doesn't present a threat to people who just want a phone with a camera, and maybe a couple of added features. Not everyone wants/needs/has money for a computer in a phone, know what I mean *cough* college students.