Who cares!? Wrong point. Nearly all devices sold have neither email ior IM support. But hell, lets IM them anyway .. from my iPhone...Oops.. I can't which Apple doesn't support anyway.
You're still not reading carefully enough.
I IM to people's SMS-only phones *all the time*. Done. Fini. Mission accomplished. And *gasp* they respond. Solved problem.
IMO, IM was left out solely for one reason: AT&T would have shit a brick, as it would completely gut one of their cash cows.
I suspect that, <24 hrs after an SDK is released, a true honest to god IM client (that you can send to SMS-only phones) will appear that bypasses AT&T's SMS system to use the unlimited data plan instead. And at that point, AT&T will realize that they swallowed the Trojan Horse. Buh-bye SMS charges.
Unless, of course, you want to keep bending over for AT&T. Go right ahead, it's your money after all.
I IM to people's SMS-only phones *all the time*. Done. Fini. Mission accomplished. And *gasp* they respond. Solved problem.
IMO, IM was left out solely for one reason: AT&T would have shit a brick, as it would completely gut one of their cash cows.
I suspect that, <24 hrs after an SDK is released, a true honest to god IM client (that you can send to SMS-only phones) will appear that bypasses AT&T's SMS system to use the unlimited data plan instead. And at that point, AT&T will realize that they swallowed the Trojan Horse. Buh-bye SMS charges.
Unless, of course, you want to keep bending over for AT&T. Go right ahead, it's your money after all.
Kickaha, you don't bring up the already existing webIM sites that seems to work quite well (not that I wouldn't rather have a native app for this). Is there a reason? Just curious if you have problems with them or what?
Tut.. tut... Using your poor historical analogy..Isn't it more along the lines of the iPhone supports a plug in serial device, but only one, yes just one, and doesn't support USB at all at present? What do we have now? No beloved and superior IM at all, but just a crippled SMS.
See below.
Quote:
Now that iPhone sales have tailed off sharply, to whom is Apple trying to sell their iPhones? Certainly not the business market, that can be agreed. Will the European iPhone model be embraced by their SMS hungry users? No, not without changes. It is for that reason alone, that I believe Apple will deliver.
On adding features like multiple recipients? Probably. On adding MMS? I really, really doubt it. The European market is a bit different at the carrier end as well...
Quote:
If Apple really cared to unshackle their customers from the clutches of the evil carriers charging them a ransom for SMS, maybe they'd conside VOIP support too, then eh, like Nokia? Now that really would be forward thinking.
TOTALLY agreed. From what I hear, SMS in Europe is damned near free. Customers there don't get bent over a barrel like US customers do, and the carriers don't have quite the rich revenue stream coming from it that their US counterparts do. Which means they'll be a lot less likely to bitch about IM, when it comes to replace, stomp on, and make SMS look utterly stupid. (Guessing that Jabber will become the de facto IM std. Most clients, outside of MSN, support it.)
My bet? We'll see an official IM client from Apple after the iPhone is rolled out worldwide. The US carriers are the ones to lose the most from an IM client. Eurocarriers don't seem like they'd mind *too* much, and as you point out, Nokia has VOIP going.
IM, email, and VOIP are going to screw the US carriers much more than anyone else... which means they couldn't really play their hand with just the US carriers on board. Once they get other companies with them, I don't see it being anything but a matter of time.
Piper Jaffray, CIBC, UBS, Goldman Sachs, BofA have all reduced their own initial estimates for the number of iPhones they believe will be sold in the final qtr. Piper's new estimate is for 800,000, the others are all less than the 1 million Apple forecast. So, RBC believes its channel checks support higher numbers. I'm going with Goldman on this one.
To support sales initiatives in Europe, Apple will need to deliver a better SMS app, irrespective of considerations of 3G support.
Kickaha, you don't bring up the already existing webIM sites that seems to work quite well (not that I wouldn't rather have a native app for this). Is there a reason? Just curious if you have problems with them or what?
Nope, just never needed them. I can do this directly from my IM client. On the iPhone, they're a good replacement at the moment.
Piper Jaffray, CIBC, UBS, Goldman Sachs, BofA have all reduced their own initial estimates for the number of iPhones they believe will be sold in the final qtr. Piper's new estimate is for 800,000, the others are all less than the 1 million Apple forecast. So, RBC believes its channel checks support higher numbers. I'm going with Goldman on this one.
That 1 million forecast was for the end of 200*8*, not 200*7*.
On adding features like multiple recipients? Probably. On adding MMS? I really, really doubt it. The European market is a bit different at the carrier end as well...
Personally, couldn't care about MMS. But everyone I know in Dublin and London, without exaggeratioon, will use MMS to send crappy photos taken with their cell phones to their mates. Their mates phones all support SMS and MMS, so its easy. So, i dont believe that encouraging the use of email to send a photo will work for them, if most other phones dont support email.
SMS to multiple recipients is a must for that market as literally it will be a deal breaker for so many potential young buyers when lack of copy/paste is factored in. So I'm confident I will get what I want out of it.
Personally, couldn't care about MMS. But everyone I know in Dublin and London, without exaggeratioon, will use MMS to send crappy photos taken with their cell phones to their mates. Their mates phones all support SMS and MMS, so its easy. So, i dont believe that encouraging the use of email to send a photo will work for them, if most other phones dont support email.
Email -> MMS. Done. Really. Not a problem. I have emailed pics to people on their phones more than once. From my email client.
Seriously, toss in an IM client, (or use one of the WebIM sites physguy has mentioned) and you have IM <-> SMS, IM <-> IM, email -> MMS, email <-> email. And that's today.
Quote:
SMS to multiple recipients is a must for that market as literally it will be a deal breaker for so many potential young buyers when lack of copy/paste is factored in. So I'm confident I will get what I want out of it.
Also, one day after purchase of the iPhone I realized that I couldn't text multiple recipients. There was nothing on the web about it at that time. Needing a different headset that would fit in my ears, I went to Apple's 5th Avenue store. I spoke with a sales assitant there and inquired about my issue with SMS, thinking I must be doing something wrong. Her response was "Wow.. that's odd..didn't realize that myself. I'm sure it will be addressed soon. I'd like it too"
Piper Jaffray, CIBC, UBS, Goldman Sachs, BofA have all reduced their own initial estimates for the number of iPhones they believe will be sold in the final qtr. Piper's new estimate is for 800,000, the others are all less than the 1 million Apple forecast. So, RBC believes its channel checks support higher numbers. I'm going with Goldman on this one.
To support sales initiatives in Europe, Apple will need to deliver a better SMS app, irrespective of considerations of 3G support.
It would be nice if you could provide links for others to read. Here's the latest Goldman estimate I could find quickly. Doesn't seem like they think it's tanking or tailing off sharply.
?Our supply chain checks suggest that Apple has pulled down its build plan for iPhone but, while the magnitude is imprecise, the numbers we are hearing still leave upside possibilities to our 2.8 million estimate for 2007,? he wrote this morning. Bailey says that ?recent history has shown that pullbacks in the stock such as we have been seeing in the last few days are exactly the sorts of buying opportunities that investors should be taking advantage of.?
Also, one day after purchase of the iPhone I realized that I couldn't text multiple recipients. There was nothing on the web about it at that time. Needing a different headset that would fit in my ears, I went to Apple's 5th Avenue store. I spoke with a sales assitant there and inquired about my issue with SMS, thinking I must be doing something wrong. Her response was "Wow.. that's odd..didn't realize that myself. I'm sure it will be addressed soon. I'd like it too"
I agree, it seems like a silly oversight. If they're going to plop an SMS client in there, they may as well make it a decent one.
Seriously, toss in an IM client, (or use one of the WebIM sites physguy has mentioned) and you have IM <-> SMS, IM <-> IM, email -> MMS, email <-> email. And that's today.
On the iPhone, IM is impractical as an SMS agent if texting multiple recipients while on the go. As far I know, no browser based IM solution for the iPhone currently available supports the sending of a message to multiple SMS recipients. It just doesn't address my needs. One-one one, perhaps but then I dont need it for that (i.e. IM to SMS; still more cumbersome and requires additional set-up), and even then I also physically need to be logged on via a web application, and then I cant receive calls on my iPhone while on Edge.
Remember the screaming about that surrounding the original iMac? Same thing. Look at where the puck is going, not where it is.
But USB and CDRW were improvements over what was already out there. The only problem was the transition period.
No-one's yet convinced me that any of these proposed alternatives to SMS are better. The only reason I see presented is cost, and I maintain that I get enough free SMS messages per month for that not to be an issue. Seriously, there is no other reason it's better. (FWIW, MMS solves the 160 character problem.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kickaha
I IM to people's SMS-only phones *all the time*. Done. Fini. Mission accomplished. And *gasp* they respond. Solved problem.
It's not a solved problem. There is no universal solution to this, that works across networks and internationally. None of the solutions (as far as I know) provide delivery reports, which show when the SMS is received on the phone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kickaha
From what I hear, SMS in Europe is damned near free. Customers there don't get bent over a barrel like US customers do, and the carriers don't have quite the rich revenue stream coming from it that their US counterparts do. Which means they'll be a lot less likely to bitch about IM, when it comes to replace, stomp on, and make SMS look utterly stupid.
SMS is nearly free, yes. In fact, my phone contract gives me unlimited MSN IMs as well as a large number of SMS. But I've uninstalled the MSN client from my phone, since I don't want to use IM on the move. I have tried both and found SMS to be superior!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kickaha
Email -> MMS. Done. Really. Not a problem. I have emailed pics to people on their phones more than once. From my email client.
You can only do that if you know their mobile network, to know what address to send to.
Stop trying to propose 'solutions' that require more work on my part than the existing state of play!
Stop trying to propose 'solutions' that require more work on my part than the existing state of play!
I'm hopeful that Apple is not trying to shoe-box me into third party browser based solutions that will require more effort on my part to support what I want to do, and that I can so easily accomplish with every other device on the market today. Hoping it's just an oversight -- it must be. Disappointed that they haven't already addressed it.
But USB and CDRW were improvements over what was already out there. The only problem was the transition period.
No-one's yet convinced me that any of these proposed alternatives to SMS are better. The only reason I see presented is cost, and I maintain that I get enough free SMS messages per month for that not to be an issue. Seriously, there is no other reason it's better. (FWIW, MMS solves the 160 character problem.)
It's not a solved problem. There is no universal solution to this, that works across networks and internationally.
Actually, there is, if people would only use it. At this rate though, you're right, it'll never happen, and we'll continue along in this balkanization of information exchange.
Jabber client on any phone with data capabilities. Jabber -> SMS gateway for legacy phones. This isn't rocket science. I believe MSN is the only major client these days that doesn't include Jabber support. I wonder why that is... hmm... oh right, balkanization.
Quote:
None of the solutions (as far as I know) provide delivery reports, which show when the SMS is received on the phone.
Mine doesn't. \
Quote:
SMS is nearly free, yes. In fact, my phone contract gives me unlimited MSN IMs as well as a large number of SMS. But I've uninstalled the MSN client from my phone, since I don't want to use IM on the move. I have tried both and found SMS to be superior!
Great! It's there for you to use. I'm talking about where things are *going*, not just where they *are*. Apple has repeatedly made moves that look utterly daft when surrounded by the current market - but prove to be prophetic about where things are *going*. I believe this is another one.
Quote:
You can only do that if you know their mobile network, to know what address to send to.
Stop trying to propose 'solutions' that require more work on my part than the existing state of play!
Sorry, I just don't buy this. When I send an IM, an email, call, or txt someone on my phone, I never, and I mean never, have to remember their address, screenname, phone number... I select *them*, and the rest is taken care of for me. There's no extra work to do. If they call, txt, IM, or email me first, then I never even have to enter in their info in the first place. It just works, as it should. I rarely ever dial a number, enter an address, or screenname manually. I pick from a list, or autocomplete takes over and I only ever have to remember their actual name. Or part of it. Pretty simple. *shrug*
Look, the lack of MMS surprised me too - for about five seconds. The iPhone isn't about bringing internet to the phone networks, it's about making the phone network Just Another ISP to access the internet. The internet is where all the good stuff is happening. Being blocked from it by your carrier is just kind of silly, when the hardware is more than capable. Breaking the current business models to get the carriers into the ISP bin is going to take a while, but I do believe that's where this is going.
Hell, bring some of the more useful features of SMS (receipt notification) into the world of IM, for all I care - the point is that the phone networks are currently off in their own sandbox, and limiting user access to the wider internet, as well as charging an arm and a leg for simple data transfers to other phones, when there's no reason other than people let them. *Nobody* would put up with an ISP that did that in this day and age. They used to exist, but folks realized how phenomenally stupid that was. We're seeing exactly the same thing now with the cell carriers. History will repeat itself. Any protocol that insists on being tied to a specific network will be subsumed by a protocol that spans networks. That's just the way these things work out over time.
The iPhone is a shot, not over the bow of the carriers, but right at their waterline. And I don't even think most of them realize it.
No-one's yet convinced me that any of these proposed alternatives to SMS are better. Stop trying to propose 'solutions' that require more work on my part than the existing state of play!
The ubiquity of SMS is not because of its superiority. It is ubiquitous because the mobile phone companies force it to be by denying the alternatives a fair chance in the market. As more phones gain IM and email clients the situation will change.
I'm not sure of your insistence that SMS in inherently easier to use. It doesn't send messages by osmosis. You have to tell it who the message is going to the same as IM and email. Generally all of this information is indexed so we never have to remember it. We only have to know the name of the person whom we are sending the message to.
Quote:
Piper Jaffray, CIBC, UBS, Goldman Sachs, BofA have all reduced their own initial estimates....
Of course sales slowed there was no way the iPhone was going to continue to sell 200,000 units every day. I wouldn't lean on what analysts say as gospel. They've been wrong many times.
It continues to be Apple trying to move in a new direction vs reproducing what's out there. Trying to develop a new market segment, rather than compete directly in existing segments. IMO, for every 'lost sale' due to these missing features Apple is picking up more than 1 sale to new users of 'expensive' phones.
All of the features in this thread are good suggestions and should be posted to Apple but if they're not implemented, or Apple takes a while to do so, it not going to be a major impact to iPhone sales and adoption. Apple is once again trying to 'skate to where the puck will be' with multi-touch and a well thought out UI taking precedence over feature list, its just that features lists are easy to compare, user experience is not. I think they're right. I also think they'll get to the features that will drive the future use, which may, or may not include those in this thread.
I'm starting to see a bit more where you're coming from... it sounds to me like the providers in the US keep locking out features of the internet from phones, and you (obviously) don't like this.
They don't do that here. 3 tried, but went back and gave full net access. Nearly every phone can run a java MSN client (although it's not used very often), and phones with a native API can run much nicer versions.
SMS here is cheap and reliable. MSN on phones is also cheap and reliable, assuming you want to talk to other MSN users. So the difference is which is more pleasant to use. I really think you're underestimating the utility of being able to send something to a phone number, rather than a separate piece of information. Yes, my phone has an address book, which even has a field for MSN. But when you're chatting to a pretty girl in a bar, you ask for her number, rather than her number and her MSN address.
If the networks provided a standardised way of mapping phone number to MSN address, that issue would be resolved for me and my major objection would be over. I don't mean as something transitional though, or an SMS gateway. I mean something that lets me just click new MSN message, and enter any phone number. It has to work with anyone, and not be opt-out or anything. But then I'd give it a go.
BTW, the use of MSN is because it is the major IM network over here. Skype is the only other big player. There's no way any phone company will convince Britons to ditch SMS for IM unless MSN is supported.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kickaha
Any protocol that insists on being tied to a specific network will be subsumed by a protocol that spans networks. That's just the way these things work out over time.
I'd say that SMS is more open than MSN, as it works to any mobile phone in the world, without having to go through one carrier's servers. MSN is controlled by one company. SMS is not.
I'm starting to see a bit more where you're coming from... it sounds to me like the providers in the US keep locking out features of the internet from phones, and you (obviously) don't like this.
YEEESSSSS! We have contact!
Quote:
They don't do that here. 3 tried, but went back and gave full net access. Nearly every phone can run a java MSN client (although it's not used very often), and phones with a native API can run much nicer versions.
Okay, now we have a clear base to work from.
Quote:
SMS here is cheap and reliable. MSN on phones is also cheap and reliable, assuming you want to talk to other MSN users. So the difference is which is more pleasant to use. I really think you're underestimating the utility of being able to send something to a phone number, rather than a separate piece of information. Yes, my phone has an address book, which even has a field for MSN. But when you're chatting to a pretty girl in a bar, you ask for her number, rather than her number and her MSN address.
If the networks provided a standardised way of mapping phone number to MSN address, that issue would be resolved for me and my major objection would be over. I don't mean as something transitional though, or an SMS gateway. I mean something that lets me just click new MSN message, and enter any phone number. It has to work with anyone, and not be opt-out or anything. But then I'd give it a go.
Alright, fair enough - now take it a step further though, (assuming you never want to have your IM and phone number tied by a third party, some anonymity is nice) and just say "send me your vCard". She can include whatever info on it she chooses, or you can send it to her phone, etc, etc. The initial phone number becomes just a way to get the whole of the info to the other person. I frequently call the person's number the second they give it to me, so they have mine in their call log. In this scenario, I'd just attach my vCard as well.
Or heck, send it to their email, or their IM, or what have you, and on next phone sync, all devices have a copy of it. Win.
The goal is that you just ask for 'contact information'. They give it, you use it.
Quote:
BTW, the use of MSN is because it is the major IM network over here. Skype is the only other big player. There's no way any phone company will convince Britons to ditch SMS for IM unless MSN is supported.
I'd say that SMS is more open than MSN, as it works to any mobile phone in the world, without having to go through one carrier's servers. MSN is controlled by one company. SMS is not.
SMS is controlled by an industry, Jabber is not.
I see your point about MSN vs. Jabber though - the solution, IMO, is an IM client that simply supports both, in a manner that is as simple to use as SMS. Get it out there, have legacy SMS-only phones use the gateways that already exist, and start the migration away from the closed-garden SMS approach to a more open one. I agree that the lack of a single IM protocol is annoying - but Jabber keeps growing, and I expect that it will end up being Jabber vs. MSN in this space... and while MS has a proven track record locking in data formats, they're not so great at protocols when an open version is available.
Alright, fair enough - now take it a step further though, (assuming you never want to have your IM and phone number tied by a third party, some anonymity is nice) and just say "send me your vCard". She can include whatever info on it she chooses, or you can send it to her phone, etc, etc. The initial phone number becomes just a way to get the whole of the info to the other person. I frequently call the person's number the second they give it to me, so they have mine in their call log. In this scenario, I'd just attach my vCard as well.
I tend to send vcards to pass contact information, but I think I'm in a minority. (People tell me off for being a geek when I do.) The standard way to do it is one person reads out their phone number, then the other person dials it. The first person then saves the number from their missed calls list.
Quote:
SMS is controlled by an industry, Jabber is not.
You know that and I know that. Most non-geek people I've met who've even heard of Jabber think it's controlled by Google.
Quote:
I expect that it will end up being Jabber vs. MSN in this space... and while MS has a proven track record locking in data formats, they're not so great at protocols when an open version is available.
I personally don't care too much which IM format wins... I use Adium and already have accounts on most of them. I hope it isn't Skype, because that protocol hasn't been reverse engineered yet. (I fear it will be though -- Skype seems to be gaining popularity fast over here.)
Anyhow, back on the topic of SMS... I still would prefer to use it compared to an IM solution, because it just works. There's no trying to work out if a device will support it... any phone anywhere in the world will. It's a great last resort when all you have is a phone number. And with delivery reports you can know if the message got through or not.
In the same way, I'm not a fan of voice over IP, outside individual companies. There isn't a standard (although SIP is trying), and everyone I know who uses it either uses Skype (which is becoming a de-facto standard in a scary proprietary way) or has VoIP bridged back to the normal telephone network and just passes out a standard phone number.
I think I just want an easy life here -- I don't want to be part of a format war, with all the incompatibility and effort it'll entail. SMS works everywhere. MMS works most of the time. If in the future a new protocol is as reliable and as easy to use, I guess I'll switch. But until then I'd rather leave the battles to someone else to fight.
Comments
Who cares!? Wrong point. Nearly all devices sold have neither email ior IM support. But hell, lets IM them anyway .. from my iPhone...Oops.. I can't which Apple doesn't support anyway.
You're still not reading carefully enough.
I IM to people's SMS-only phones *all the time*. Done. Fini. Mission accomplished. And *gasp* they respond. Solved problem.
IMO, IM was left out solely for one reason: AT&T would have shit a brick, as it would completely gut one of their cash cows.
I suspect that, <24 hrs after an SDK is released, a true honest to god IM client (that you can send to SMS-only phones) will appear that bypasses AT&T's SMS system to use the unlimited data plan instead. And at that point, AT&T will realize that they swallowed the Trojan Horse. Buh-bye SMS charges.
Unless, of course, you want to keep bending over for AT&T. Go right ahead, it's your money after all.
You're still not reading carefully enough.
I IM to people's SMS-only phones *all the time*. Done. Fini. Mission accomplished. And *gasp* they respond. Solved problem.
IMO, IM was left out solely for one reason: AT&T would have shit a brick, as it would completely gut one of their cash cows.
I suspect that, <24 hrs after an SDK is released, a true honest to god IM client (that you can send to SMS-only phones) will appear that bypasses AT&T's SMS system to use the unlimited data plan instead. And at that point, AT&T will realize that they swallowed the Trojan Horse. Buh-bye SMS charges.
Unless, of course, you want to keep bending over for AT&T. Go right ahead, it's your money after all.
Kickaha, you don't bring up the already existing webIM sites that seems to work quite well (not that I wouldn't rather have a native app for this). Is there a reason? Just curious if you have problems with them or what?
Tut.. tut... Using your poor historical analogy..Isn't it more along the lines of the iPhone supports a plug in serial device, but only one, yes just one, and doesn't support USB at all at present? What do we have now? No beloved and superior IM at all, but just a crippled SMS.
See below.
Now that iPhone sales have tailed off sharply, to whom is Apple trying to sell their iPhones? Certainly not the business market, that can be agreed. Will the European iPhone model be embraced by their SMS hungry users? No, not without changes. It is for that reason alone, that I believe Apple will deliver.
On adding features like multiple recipients? Probably. On adding MMS? I really, really doubt it. The European market is a bit different at the carrier end as well...
If Apple really cared to unshackle their customers from the clutches of the evil carriers charging them a ransom for SMS, maybe they'd conside VOIP support too, then eh, like Nokia? Now that really would be forward thinking.
TOTALLY agreed. From what I hear, SMS in Europe is damned near free. Customers there don't get bent over a barrel like US customers do, and the carriers don't have quite the rich revenue stream coming from it that their US counterparts do. Which means they'll be a lot less likely to bitch about IM, when it comes to replace, stomp on, and make SMS look utterly stupid. (Guessing that Jabber will become the de facto IM std. Most clients, outside of MSN, support it.)
My bet? We'll see an official IM client from Apple after the iPhone is rolled out worldwide. The US carriers are the ones to lose the most from an IM client. Eurocarriers don't seem like they'd mind *too* much, and as you point out, Nokia has VOIP going.
IM, email, and VOIP are going to screw the US carriers much more than anyone else... which means they couldn't really play their hand with just the US carriers on board. Once they get other companies with them, I don't see it being anything but a matter of time.
To support sales initiatives in Europe, Apple will need to deliver a better SMS app, irrespective of considerations of 3G support.
Kickaha, you don't bring up the already existing webIM sites that seems to work quite well (not that I wouldn't rather have a native app for this). Is there a reason? Just curious if you have problems with them or what?
Nope, just never needed them. I can do this directly from my IM client. On the iPhone, they're a good replacement at the moment.
Piper Jaffray, CIBC, UBS, Goldman Sachs, BofA have all reduced their own initial estimates for the number of iPhones they believe will be sold in the final qtr. Piper's new estimate is for 800,000, the others are all less than the 1 million Apple forecast. So, RBC believes its channel checks support higher numbers. I'm going with Goldman on this one.
That 1 million forecast was for the end of 200*8*, not 200*7*.
On adding features like multiple recipients? Probably. On adding MMS? I really, really doubt it. The European market is a bit different at the carrier end as well...
Personally, couldn't care about MMS. But everyone I know in Dublin and London, without exaggeratioon, will use MMS to send crappy photos taken with their cell phones to their mates. Their mates phones all support SMS and MMS, so its easy. So, i dont believe that encouraging the use of email to send a photo will work for them, if most other phones dont support email.
SMS to multiple recipients is a must for that market as literally it will be a deal breaker for so many potential young buyers when lack of copy/paste is factored in. So I'm confident I will get what I want out of it.
Personally, couldn't care about MMS. But everyone I know in Dublin and London, without exaggeratioon, will use MMS to send crappy photos taken with their cell phones to their mates. Their mates phones all support SMS and MMS, so its easy. So, i dont believe that encouraging the use of email to send a photo will work for them, if most other phones dont support email.
Email -> MMS. Done. Really. Not a problem. I have emailed pics to people on their phones more than once. From my email client.
Seriously, toss in an IM client, (or use one of the WebIM sites physguy has mentioned) and you have IM <-> SMS, IM <-> IM, email -> MMS, email <-> email. And that's today.
SMS to multiple recipients is a must for that market as literally it will be a deal breaker for so many potential young buyers when lack of copy/paste is factored in. So I'm confident I will get what I want out of it.
Great. Did you ever send Apple feedback?
Also, one day after purchase of the iPhone I realized that I couldn't text multiple recipients. There was nothing on the web about it at that time. Needing a different headset that would fit in my ears, I went to Apple's 5th Avenue store. I spoke with a sales assitant there and inquired about my issue with SMS, thinking I must be doing something wrong. Her response was "Wow.. that's odd..didn't realize that myself. I'm sure it will be addressed soon. I'd like it too"
Piper Jaffray, CIBC, UBS, Goldman Sachs, BofA have all reduced their own initial estimates for the number of iPhones they believe will be sold in the final qtr. Piper's new estimate is for 800,000, the others are all less than the 1 million Apple forecast. So, RBC believes its channel checks support higher numbers. I'm going with Goldman on this one.
To support sales initiatives in Europe, Apple will need to deliver a better SMS app, irrespective of considerations of 3G support.
It would be nice if you could provide links for others to read. Here's the latest Goldman estimate I could find quickly. Doesn't seem like they think it's tanking or tailing off sharply.
Aug 1 report
From Goldman Analyst
?Our supply chain checks suggest that Apple has pulled down its build plan for iPhone but, while the magnitude is imprecise, the numbers we are hearing still leave upside possibilities to our 2.8 million estimate for 2007,? he wrote this morning. Bailey says that ?recent history has shown that pullbacks in the stock such as we have been seeing in the last few days are exactly the sorts of buying opportunities that investors should be taking advantage of.?
Yes, Apple received feedback.
Cool beans. I bitch to them regularly.
Also, one day after purchase of the iPhone I realized that I couldn't text multiple recipients. There was nothing on the web about it at that time. Needing a different headset that would fit in my ears, I went to Apple's 5th Avenue store. I spoke with a sales assitant there and inquired about my issue with SMS, thinking I must be doing something wrong. Her response was "Wow.. that's odd..didn't realize that myself. I'm sure it will be addressed soon. I'd like it too"
I agree, it seems like a silly oversight. If they're going to plop an SMS client in there, they may as well make it a decent one.
Seriously, toss in an IM client, (or use one of the WebIM sites physguy has mentioned) and you have IM <-> SMS, IM <-> IM, email -> MMS, email <-> email. And that's today.
On the iPhone, IM is impractical as an SMS agent if texting multiple recipients while on the go. As far I know, no browser based IM solution for the iPhone currently available supports the sending of a message to multiple SMS recipients. It just doesn't address my needs. One-one one, perhaps but then I dont need it for that (i.e. IM to SMS; still more cumbersome and requires additional set-up), and even then I also physically need to be logged on via a web application, and then I cant receive calls on my iPhone while on Edge.
Remember the screaming about that surrounding the original iMac? Same thing. Look at where the puck is going, not where it is.
But USB and CDRW were improvements over what was already out there. The only problem was the transition period.
No-one's yet convinced me that any of these proposed alternatives to SMS are better. The only reason I see presented is cost, and I maintain that I get enough free SMS messages per month for that not to be an issue. Seriously, there is no other reason it's better. (FWIW, MMS solves the 160 character problem.)
I IM to people's SMS-only phones *all the time*. Done. Fini. Mission accomplished. And *gasp* they respond. Solved problem.
It's not a solved problem. There is no universal solution to this, that works across networks and internationally. None of the solutions (as far as I know) provide delivery reports, which show when the SMS is received on the phone.
From what I hear, SMS in Europe is damned near free. Customers there don't get bent over a barrel like US customers do, and the carriers don't have quite the rich revenue stream coming from it that their US counterparts do. Which means they'll be a lot less likely to bitch about IM, when it comes to replace, stomp on, and make SMS look utterly stupid.
SMS is nearly free, yes. In fact, my phone contract gives me unlimited MSN IMs as well as a large number of SMS. But I've uninstalled the MSN client from my phone, since I don't want to use IM on the move. I have tried both and found SMS to be superior!
Email -> MMS. Done. Really. Not a problem. I have emailed pics to people on their phones more than once. From my email client.
You can only do that if you know their mobile network, to know what address to send to.
Stop trying to propose 'solutions' that require more work on my part than the existing state of play!
Stop trying to propose 'solutions' that require more work on my part than the existing state of play!
I'm hopeful that Apple is not trying to shoe-box me into third party browser based solutions that will require more effort on my part to support what I want to do, and that I can so easily accomplish with every other device on the market today. Hoping it's just an oversight -- it must be. Disappointed that they haven't already addressed it.
But USB and CDRW were improvements over what was already out there. The only problem was the transition period.
No-one's yet convinced me that any of these proposed alternatives to SMS are better. The only reason I see presented is cost, and I maintain that I get enough free SMS messages per month for that not to be an issue. Seriously, there is no other reason it's better. (FWIW, MMS solves the 160 character problem.)
It's not a solved problem. There is no universal solution to this, that works across networks and internationally.
Actually, there is, if people would only use it. At this rate though, you're right, it'll never happen, and we'll continue along in this balkanization of information exchange.
Jabber client on any phone with data capabilities. Jabber -> SMS gateway for legacy phones. This isn't rocket science. I believe MSN is the only major client these days that doesn't include Jabber support. I wonder why that is... hmm... oh right, balkanization.
None of the solutions (as far as I know) provide delivery reports, which show when the SMS is received on the phone.
Mine doesn't.
SMS is nearly free, yes. In fact, my phone contract gives me unlimited MSN IMs as well as a large number of SMS. But I've uninstalled the MSN client from my phone, since I don't want to use IM on the move. I have tried both and found SMS to be superior!
Great! It's there for you to use. I'm talking about where things are *going*, not just where they *are*. Apple has repeatedly made moves that look utterly daft when surrounded by the current market - but prove to be prophetic about where things are *going*. I believe this is another one.
You can only do that if you know their mobile network, to know what address to send to.
Stop trying to propose 'solutions' that require more work on my part than the existing state of play!
Sorry, I just don't buy this. When I send an IM, an email, call, or txt someone on my phone, I never, and I mean never, have to remember their address, screenname, phone number... I select *them*, and the rest is taken care of for me. There's no extra work to do. If they call, txt, IM, or email me first, then I never even have to enter in their info in the first place. It just works, as it should. I rarely ever dial a number, enter an address, or screenname manually. I pick from a list, or autocomplete takes over and I only ever have to remember their actual name. Or part of it. Pretty simple. *shrug*
Look, the lack of MMS surprised me too - for about five seconds. The iPhone isn't about bringing internet to the phone networks, it's about making the phone network Just Another ISP to access the internet. The internet is where all the good stuff is happening. Being blocked from it by your carrier is just kind of silly, when the hardware is more than capable. Breaking the current business models to get the carriers into the ISP bin is going to take a while, but I do believe that's where this is going.
Hell, bring some of the more useful features of SMS (receipt notification) into the world of IM, for all I care - the point is that the phone networks are currently off in their own sandbox, and limiting user access to the wider internet, as well as charging an arm and a leg for simple data transfers to other phones, when there's no reason other than people let them. *Nobody* would put up with an ISP that did that in this day and age. They used to exist, but folks realized how phenomenally stupid that was. We're seeing exactly the same thing now with the cell carriers. History will repeat itself. Any protocol that insists on being tied to a specific network will be subsumed by a protocol that spans networks. That's just the way these things work out over time.
The iPhone is a shot, not over the bow of the carriers, but right at their waterline. And I don't even think most of them realize it.
No-one's yet convinced me that any of these proposed alternatives to SMS are better. Stop trying to propose 'solutions' that require more work on my part than the existing state of play!
The ubiquity of SMS is not because of its superiority. It is ubiquitous because the mobile phone companies force it to be by denying the alternatives a fair chance in the market. As more phones gain IM and email clients the situation will change.
I'm not sure of your insistence that SMS in inherently easier to use. It doesn't send messages by osmosis. You have to tell it who the message is going to the same as IM and email. Generally all of this information is indexed so we never have to remember it. We only have to know the name of the person whom we are sending the message to.
Piper Jaffray, CIBC, UBS, Goldman Sachs, BofA have all reduced their own initial estimates....
Of course sales slowed there was no way the iPhone was going to continue to sell 200,000 units every day. I wouldn't lean on what analysts say as gospel. They've been wrong many times.
1) Too expensive will never sell - whoops selling like hotcakes
2) Doesn't have the features it MUST have
iPod - FM tuner; iPhone - MMS
iPod - voice recording; iPhone mechanical keyboard
etc., etc., etc.
Here's the next parallel just out on AI.
iPhone overcoming corporate barriers
It continues to be Apple trying to move in a new direction vs reproducing what's out there. Trying to develop a new market segment, rather than compete directly in existing segments. IMO, for every 'lost sale' due to these missing features Apple is picking up more than 1 sale to new users of 'expensive' phones.
All of the features in this thread are good suggestions and should be posted to Apple but if they're not implemented, or Apple takes a while to do so, it not going to be a major impact to iPhone sales and adoption. Apple is once again trying to 'skate to where the puck will be' with multi-touch and a well thought out UI taking precedence over feature list, its just that features lists are easy to compare, user experience is not. I think they're right. I also think they'll get to the features that will drive the future use, which may, or may not include those in this thread.
They don't do that here. 3 tried, but went back and gave full net access. Nearly every phone can run a java MSN client (although it's not used very often), and phones with a native API can run much nicer versions.
SMS here is cheap and reliable. MSN on phones is also cheap and reliable, assuming you want to talk to other MSN users. So the difference is which is more pleasant to use. I really think you're underestimating the utility of being able to send something to a phone number, rather than a separate piece of information. Yes, my phone has an address book, which even has a field for MSN. But when you're chatting to a pretty girl in a bar, you ask for her number, rather than her number and her MSN address.
If the networks provided a standardised way of mapping phone number to MSN address, that issue would be resolved for me and my major objection would be over. I don't mean as something transitional though, or an SMS gateway. I mean something that lets me just click new MSN message, and enter any phone number. It has to work with anyone, and not be opt-out or anything. But then I'd give it a go.
BTW, the use of MSN is because it is the major IM network over here. Skype is the only other big player. There's no way any phone company will convince Britons to ditch SMS for IM unless MSN is supported.
Any protocol that insists on being tied to a specific network will be subsumed by a protocol that spans networks. That's just the way these things work out over time.
I'd say that SMS is more open than MSN, as it works to any mobile phone in the world, without having to go through one carrier's servers. MSN is controlled by one company. SMS is not.
Amorya
I'm starting to see a bit more where you're coming from... it sounds to me like the providers in the US keep locking out features of the internet from phones, and you (obviously) don't like this.
YEEESSSSS! We have contact!
They don't do that here. 3 tried, but went back and gave full net access. Nearly every phone can run a java MSN client (although it's not used very often), and phones with a native API can run much nicer versions.
Okay, now we have a clear base to work from.
SMS here is cheap and reliable. MSN on phones is also cheap and reliable, assuming you want to talk to other MSN users. So the difference is which is more pleasant to use. I really think you're underestimating the utility of being able to send something to a phone number, rather than a separate piece of information. Yes, my phone has an address book, which even has a field for MSN. But when you're chatting to a pretty girl in a bar, you ask for her number, rather than her number and her MSN address.
If the networks provided a standardised way of mapping phone number to MSN address, that issue would be resolved for me and my major objection would be over. I don't mean as something transitional though, or an SMS gateway. I mean something that lets me just click new MSN message, and enter any phone number. It has to work with anyone, and not be opt-out or anything. But then I'd give it a go.
Alright, fair enough - now take it a step further though, (assuming you never want to have your IM and phone number tied by a third party, some anonymity is nice) and just say "send me your vCard". She can include whatever info on it she chooses, or you can send it to her phone, etc, etc. The initial phone number becomes just a way to get the whole of the info to the other person. I frequently call the person's number the second they give it to me, so they have mine in their call log. In this scenario, I'd just attach my vCard as well.
Or heck, send it to their email, or their IM, or what have you, and on next phone sync, all devices have a copy of it. Win.
The goal is that you just ask for 'contact information'. They give it, you use it.
BTW, the use of MSN is because it is the major IM network over here. Skype is the only other big player. There's no way any phone company will convince Britons to ditch SMS for IM unless MSN is supported.
I'd say that SMS is more open than MSN, as it works to any mobile phone in the world, without having to go through one carrier's servers. MSN is controlled by one company. SMS is not.
SMS is controlled by an industry, Jabber is not.
I see your point about MSN vs. Jabber though - the solution, IMO, is an IM client that simply supports both, in a manner that is as simple to use as SMS. Get it out there, have legacy SMS-only phones use the gateways that already exist, and start the migration away from the closed-garden SMS approach to a more open one. I agree that the lack of a single IM protocol is annoying - but Jabber keeps growing, and I expect that it will end up being Jabber vs. MSN in this space... and while MS has a proven track record locking in data formats, they're not so great at protocols when an open version is available.
Alright, fair enough - now take it a step further though, (assuming you never want to have your IM and phone number tied by a third party, some anonymity is nice) and just say "send me your vCard". She can include whatever info on it she chooses, or you can send it to her phone, etc, etc. The initial phone number becomes just a way to get the whole of the info to the other person. I frequently call the person's number the second they give it to me, so they have mine in their call log. In this scenario, I'd just attach my vCard as well.
I tend to send vcards to pass contact information, but I think I'm in a minority. (People tell me off for being a geek when I do.) The standard way to do it is one person reads out their phone number, then the other person dials it. The first person then saves the number from their missed calls list.
SMS is controlled by an industry, Jabber is not.
You know that and I know that. Most non-geek people I've met who've even heard of Jabber think it's controlled by Google.
I expect that it will end up being Jabber vs. MSN in this space... and while MS has a proven track record locking in data formats, they're not so great at protocols when an open version is available.
I personally don't care too much which IM format wins... I use Adium and already have accounts on most of them. I hope it isn't Skype, because that protocol hasn't been reverse engineered yet. (I fear it will be though -- Skype seems to be gaining popularity fast over here.)
Anyhow, back on the topic of SMS... I still would prefer to use it compared to an IM solution, because it just works. There's no trying to work out if a device will support it... any phone anywhere in the world will. It's a great last resort when all you have is a phone number. And with delivery reports you can know if the message got through or not.
In the same way, I'm not a fan of voice over IP, outside individual companies. There isn't a standard (although SIP is trying), and everyone I know who uses it either uses Skype (which is becoming a de-facto standard in a scary proprietary way) or has VoIP bridged back to the normal telephone network and just passes out a standard phone number.
I think I just want an easy life here -- I don't want to be part of a format war, with all the incompatibility and effort it'll entail. SMS works everywhere. MMS works most of the time. If in the future a new protocol is as reliable and as easy to use, I guess I'll switch. But until then I'd rather leave the battles to someone else to fight.
Amorya