Actually that's the problem with most of the things that Apple releases: it's like the products are made for Jobs, not the general public. That's a mistake that might cost them dearly in the future, as it did already in the past.
Don't get me wrong, I disagree with a lot of what Jobs does. I think the phone should allow third party apps. It's one of the two reasons I haven't bought the phone yet, the other being 3G.
But, I know enough to understand that if a product doesn't do what you need, no matter how "cool" it is, you don't buy it. You don't buy it, and then complain that it doesn't do what you want it to. That's being foolish. It's why I have no sympathy for those who have bought it, and have done what Apple said not to do, and have had problems because of it.
Apple isn't the only company that does this, almost all companies do.
If you make an unauthorized modification to a product, and you "brick" it, or if an expected update does, hey, tough! Companies don't feel under any obligation to take care of it. After all, they told you not to do it.
COOLFACTOR: am i hearing an echo of apple's pr department? all you really post are 'explanations' of apple's official statements..... let me guess, you are either directly on their payrol (its a fact that they monitor forums like these) or so apple blinded that they simply "can do no evil" no matter what.
Isn't there a halfway point here between adding full-blown 3rd-party apps and adding functionality to the iPhone?
Why can't we just get a Widgets icon on the iPhone's home screen that lists or Widgets. A less elegant solution would be to allow the home-screen to scroll revealing more icons than the 16+4 spaces available.
Personally, I'd like to see an iTunes tab when the iPhone is selected that would allow me to rearrange the icons as I see fit. Putting some unused ones into folders and moving certain ones to certain areas for easier access. Even allowing for the removal of certain icons the way you can with Apple's Customized Toolbar. A simple reset included as well.
There are over 3700 widgets out there. Most are not suited or optimized for the iPhone's interface but I would love to have most of Apple's default Widgets on my phone.
With all these hacks, why haven't these simple Widgets been revamped and added to the device? I may have actually hacked my phone then!
COOLFACTOR: am i hearing an echo of apple's pr department? all you really post are 'explanations' of apple's official statements..... let me guess, you are either directly on their payrol (its a fact that they monitor forums like these) or so apple blinded that they simply "can do no evil" no matter what.
How come you didn't consider the possibility that he's just a satisfied customer? OR, are you a Microsoft/Verizon/whatever shill?
Apple has clearly stated, in public, that AppleTV is a "hobby" right now. That's confirmation that they are working on it, but not devoting all of their resources to it.
It's not a "hobby", it's just another product that Apple released to please the shareholders (just like the Mac mini). Even as crap as the product is compared to the competition, Apple knows that there are some devotees who will overlook the fact that it's crap and buy it anyway. I wonder how many of these has Apple sold, probably not that many, otherwise they would come out with sales figures. I'm betting that in a year from now they will have stop selling it (like the Hi-Fi) in favour of more lucrative businesses like the iPod/iPhone.
COOLFACTOR: am i hearing an echo of apple's pr department? all you really post are 'explanations' of apple's official statements..... let me guess, you are either directly on their payrol (its a fact that they monitor forums like these) or so apple blinded that they simply "can do no evil" no matter what.
No, he (or she) is someone who actually reads and understands what is being said. As I've said elsewhere Apple had been amazingly transparent in what they have been doing with the iPhone. They've said they weren't supporting third-party development. They went out of their way to warn those that did unlock their SIM that the 1.1.1 upgrade could brick their iPhones. Like others here I think Apple is making a mistake about the development but its their mistake to make. They are harming anyone, they aren't being deceptive. There are two recourses - don't buy it, send apple feedback. Otherwise, get over yourself.
No, he (or she) is someone who actually reads and understands what is being said. As I've said elsewhere Apple had been amazingly transparent in what they have been doing with the iPhone. They've said they weren't supporting third-party development. They went out of their way to warn those that did unlock their SIM that the 1.1.1 upgrade could brick their iPhones. Like others here I think Apple is making a mistake about the development but its their mistake to make. They are harming anyone, they aren't being deceptive. There are two recourses - don't buy it, send apple feedback. Otherwise, get over yourself.
Oh, right, that's a good logic. It's like saying that because Ahmadinejad has stated that he is pursuing nuclear weaponry instead of lying makes it OK. I'm not complaining about Apple lying, I'm complaining on what I perceive as being several attempts at creating a monopoly, with the iPod/iPhone. We've all blamed Microsoft for doing it in the past, why should Apple receive any other treatment?
It's not a "hobby", it's just another product that Apple released to please the shareholders (just like the Mac mini). Even as crap as the product is compared to the competition, Apple knows that there are some devotees who will overlook the fact that it's crap and buy it anyway. I wonder how many of these has Apple sold, probably not that many, otherwise they would come out with sales figures. I'm betting that in a year from now they will have stop selling it (like the Hi-Fi) in favour of more lucrative businesses like the iPod/iPhone.
They've sold over a quarter-million units. Not bad too shabby for a "hobby." It has the same 24-month accounting method as the iPhone and it isn't going to go away anytime soon. Apple needs this device more than you realize.
For the price, it's a great product when compared to similiar devices and it's Apple's lowest profit margin device. The point of the AppleTV is/was to get the studios interested in getting their content on iTunes with a feeling of security and control. That hasn't gone very well.
The AppleTV is only a "hobby" until HD movies and/or rentals become available on iTunes, then it becomes Apple's 4th leg. (speculation)
Worst Case Scenario:
If the all TV studios pulled out of iTunes then Apple merely reengineers AppleTV to be a DVR but doesn't charge monthly fees like TiVo. They could also use the USB 2.0 to daisy chain additional, stackable Apple branded HDDs to the AppleTV unit.
If the MPAA pulls out of iTunes then AppleTV could easily add a DVD-ROM, HD-DVD, or Blu-ray drive along with it's other DVR features.
I don't see Apple losing a dime on AppleTV. (speculation)
COOLFACTOR: am i hearing an echo of apple's pr department? all you really post are 'explanations' of apple's official statements..... let me guess, you are either directly on their payrol (its a fact that they monitor forums like these) or so apple blinded that they simply "can do no evil" no matter what.
Neither. Nice try though. To me, it's just common sense. All the bitching about Apple not supporting 3rd-party apps on the iPhone has been spun as if Apple is against the idea. They're not. They're just rolling out their product according to their product roll-out plans. That doesn't include 3rd-party apps at this stage.
Oh, right, that's a good logic. It's like saying that because Ahmadinejad has stated that he is pursuing nuclear weaponry instead of lying makes it OK. I'm not complaining about Apple lying, I'm complaining on what I perceive as being several attempts at creating a monopoly, with the iPod/iPhone. We've all blamed Microsoft for doing it in the past, why should Apple receive any other treatment?
If you understood the state of cellular carrier industry before Apple, and if you understood what Apple is trying to change, then you'd be willing to live with some of the limitations until such time that the marketplace is changed.
Let me repeat that but using music and mp3 players: If you understood the state of the music distribution industry (labels) before Apple, and if you understood what Apple was trying to change, then you'd be willing to live with DRM until such time that the marketplace is changed.
I could repeat it again for broadband IP, but the broadband IP market already changed from the days of closed access via AOL and Earthlink, to the IP bit pipe that is your cable or DSL company. (I'm not saying there aren't still challenges here, for example, the net neutrality issue.) This is the goal of Apple with regard to the cell phone market; to change it into a mobile IP market where the cell carrier is just a pipe like the cable or DSL company. (And the AppleTV will work a similar plan against the video distribution industry.) The question is how to get there?
Apple looked at an MVNO (source: Jobs). For what must be economic reasons, an MVNO has always been done with one carrier in an area providing the underlying service. So if Apple was an MVNO, iPhone would be locked to Apple (and its underlying carrier). All the handset revenue would belong to Apple, and the monthly service revenue would be split between Apple and the carrier. Instead of the MVNO, Apple decided to take advantage of the carrier's nationwide marketing and distribution support (since there are less than 200 Apple stores), making public the underlying carrier as AT&T; get them to revise their activation process, add visual voicemail, and unlimited data (but without VoIP and other limitations) at a reasonable price; and revised the split a bit in favor of the carrier (AT&T).
Let's explore what a next step could be. Possibly Apple could get AT&T to allow Voice over the data pipe (VoIP); AT&T could have a plan that charges $100 for unlimited data and VoIP. If AT&T's equipment could reliably measure VoIP usage, then there could be lower-cost plans with limited VoIP minutes. Of course, all this data will require that AT&T build out a bigger pipe (3G and above) nationwide. (Note: AT&T CEO did say they were working on VoIP.) To encourage AT&T to do this, Apple could reduce their monthly revenue share, possibly even to zero. (Note: You can only reduce your share if you have a share in the first place.)
There are lots of other possibilities; I don't presume to know exactly what Apple has in store, but there is much more, and this is just the first step.
I assume that most of you understood the relationship of my post to no 3rd-party apps: no free VoIP, no free SMS/MMS, and related: no unlock.
Apple has to show AT&T that the revenue they get from cell voice and other services can be dramatically increased if they just charge for unlimited data instead. Because there is a huge market currently paying zero for data (and getting no data and just not yet interested in data). But the iPhone will make them interested in data (Web apps, anyone?)
(Apple has to show the labels that the revenue they get from music downloads can be dramatically increased if they charge a reasonable price for unprotected downloads. Because there is a huge market currently paying zero for digital music.)
Again, this is already in place for broadband IP today (lots of people paying $40+/month for cable/DSL/ broadband that paid zero before (or they paid AOL/Earthlink $20/month)).
Comments
I believe that's known as signing a Non-Disclosure Agreement.
You make it sound like they made them pinky-promise.
There aren't hundreds, there are a few dozen, mostly very minor.
Fair enough. There's probably hundreds in development, though. :-)
Ugghh!
Yeah, that was my impression too. Fugly. Still, the promise everyone seems to want is there. Perhaps you can get it in a muddy brown color.
Here's the phone people are wanting:
Have at it.
All I see is a series of slick photoshop (OK, ok... gimp?) mockups.
Has anyone had one of these in their hands yet?
All I see is a series of slick photoshop (OK, ok... gimp?) mockups.
Has anyone had one of these in their hands yet?
https://direct.openmoko.com/
You can buy something for $300.00 USD
Here's what it can and can't do at this time:
http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Developer_preview
What you can expect
* a functional bootloader with support for firmware upgrades
* a functional Linux kernel with basic drivers for the various hardware subsystems, with small bugs here and there
* a basic, simple linux distribution based on OpenEmbedded, that you have to install yourself as rootfs image using USB DFU
* all the source code that we have at this point in time, and the corresponding build system
* mailing lists
What you CAN NOT expect yet
* reliable means of making phone calls, esp. not from the UI
* reliable means of sending/receiving SMS, esp. not from the UI
* integrated GPRS data access
* bluetooth integration (basic bluez driver works)
* proper power management (i.e. no reasonable battery life yet)
* ringtone (or other) profile management
* network preferences (call deflection, manual operator selection, ...)
* a complete application framework where third party application developers can write apps that easily integrate with the OpenMoko world
Still, it's what people want...
Right?
Actually that's the problem with most of the things that Apple releases: it's like the products are made for Jobs, not the general public. That's a mistake that might cost them dearly in the future, as it did already in the past.
Don't get me wrong, I disagree with a lot of what Jobs does. I think the phone should allow third party apps. It's one of the two reasons I haven't bought the phone yet, the other being 3G.
But, I know enough to understand that if a product doesn't do what you need, no matter how "cool" it is, you don't buy it. You don't buy it, and then complain that it doesn't do what you want it to. That's being foolish. It's why I have no sympathy for those who have bought it, and have done what Apple said not to do, and have had problems because of it.
Apple isn't the only company that does this, almost all companies do.
If you make an unauthorized modification to a product, and you "brick" it, or if an expected update does, hey, tough! Companies don't feel under any obligation to take care of it. After all, they told you not to do it.
Fair enough. There's probably hundreds in development, though. :-)
No important company will make apps for the phone, or iTouch, if Apple won't support them. I don't blame them.
I still have hopes that Apple will support third party apps other than what they are doing now.
Companies don't feel under any oblication to take care of it. After all, they told you not to do it.
Well said.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Apple should tell people to not put their iPhones in a bucket of water. That'll take care of the idiots.
Some of the idiots.
Why can't we just get a Widgets icon on the iPhone's home screen that lists or Widgets. A less elegant solution would be to allow the home-screen to scroll revealing more icons than the 16+4 spaces available.
Personally, I'd like to see an iTunes tab when the iPhone is selected that would allow me to rearrange the icons as I see fit. Putting some unused ones into folders and moving certain ones to certain areas for easier access. Even allowing for the removal of certain icons the way you can with Apple's Customized Toolbar. A simple reset included as well.
There are over 3700 widgets out there. Most are not suited or optimized for the iPhone's interface but I would love to have most of Apple's default Widgets on my phone.
With all these hacks, why haven't these simple Widgets been revamped and added to the device? I may have actually hacked my phone then!
These should have been there from the start!
• Flight Tracker
• Package Tracker
• Translation
• Dictionary
• Business Finder
• People Finder
• Movies
• Unit Convertor
• Mayan End of the World Countdown Clock
PS: That Linux OpenMoko phone is hideous.
COOLFACTOR: am i hearing an echo of apple's pr department? all you really post are 'explanations' of apple's official statements..... let me guess, you are either directly on their payrol (its a fact that they monitor forums like these) or so apple blinded that they simply "can do no evil" no matter what.
How come you didn't consider the possibility that he's just a satisfied customer? OR, are you a Microsoft/Verizon/whatever shill?
Hmmm...
Apple has clearly stated, in public, that AppleTV is a "hobby" right now. That's confirmation that they are working on it, but not devoting all of their resources to it.
It's not a "hobby", it's just another product that Apple released to please the shareholders (just like the Mac mini). Even as crap as the product is compared to the competition, Apple knows that there are some devotees who will overlook the fact that it's crap and buy it anyway. I wonder how many of these has Apple sold, probably not that many, otherwise they would come out with sales figures. I'm betting that in a year from now they will have stop selling it (like the Hi-Fi) in favour of more lucrative businesses like the iPod/iPhone.
COOLFACTOR: am i hearing an echo of apple's pr department? all you really post are 'explanations' of apple's official statements..... let me guess, you are either directly on their payrol (its a fact that they monitor forums like these) or so apple blinded that they simply "can do no evil" no matter what.
No, he (or she) is someone who actually reads and understands what is being said. As I've said elsewhere Apple had been amazingly transparent in what they have been doing with the iPhone. They've said they weren't supporting third-party development. They went out of their way to warn those that did unlock their SIM that the 1.1.1 upgrade could brick their iPhones. Like others here I think Apple is making a mistake about the development but its their mistake to make. They are harming anyone, they aren't being deceptive. There are two recourses - don't buy it, send apple feedback. Otherwise, get over yourself.
No, he (or she) is someone who actually reads and understands what is being said. As I've said elsewhere Apple had been amazingly transparent in what they have been doing with the iPhone. They've said they weren't supporting third-party development. They went out of their way to warn those that did unlock their SIM that the 1.1.1 upgrade could brick their iPhones. Like others here I think Apple is making a mistake about the development but its their mistake to make. They are harming anyone, they aren't being deceptive. There are two recourses - don't buy it, send apple feedback. Otherwise, get over yourself.
Oh, right, that's a good logic. It's like saying that because Ahmadinejad has stated that he is pursuing nuclear weaponry instead of lying makes it OK. I'm not complaining about Apple lying, I'm complaining on what I perceive as being several attempts at creating a monopoly, with the iPod/iPhone. We've all blamed Microsoft for doing it in the past, why should Apple receive any other treatment?
It's not a "hobby", it's just another product that Apple released to please the shareholders (just like the Mac mini). Even as crap as the product is compared to the competition, Apple knows that there are some devotees who will overlook the fact that it's crap and buy it anyway. I wonder how many of these has Apple sold, probably not that many, otherwise they would come out with sales figures. I'm betting that in a year from now they will have stop selling it (like the Hi-Fi) in favour of more lucrative businesses like the iPod/iPhone.
They've sold over a quarter-million units. Not bad too shabby for a "hobby." It has the same 24-month accounting method as the iPhone and it isn't going to go away anytime soon. Apple needs this device more than you realize.
For the price, it's a great product when compared to similiar devices and it's Apple's lowest profit margin device. The point of the AppleTV is/was to get the studios interested in getting their content on iTunes with a feeling of security and control. That hasn't gone very well.
The AppleTV is only a "hobby" until HD movies and/or rentals become available on iTunes, then it becomes Apple's 4th leg. (speculation)
Worst Case Scenario:
If the all TV studios pulled out of iTunes then Apple merely reengineers AppleTV to be a DVR but doesn't charge monthly fees like TiVo. They could also use the USB 2.0 to daisy chain additional, stackable Apple branded HDDs to the AppleTV unit.
If the MPAA pulls out of iTunes then AppleTV could easily add a DVD-ROM, HD-DVD, or Blu-ray drive along with it's other DVR features.
I don't see Apple losing a dime on AppleTV. (speculation)
COOLFACTOR: am i hearing an echo of apple's pr department? all you really post are 'explanations' of apple's official statements..... let me guess, you are either directly on their payrol (its a fact that they monitor forums like these) or so apple blinded that they simply "can do no evil" no matter what.
Neither. Nice try though. To me, it's just common sense. All the bitching about Apple not supporting 3rd-party apps on the iPhone has been spun as if Apple is against the idea. They're not. They're just rolling out their product according to their product roll-out plans. That doesn't include 3rd-party apps at this stage.
Oh, right, that's a good logic. It's like saying that because Ahmadinejad has stated that he is pursuing nuclear weaponry instead of lying makes it OK. I'm not complaining about Apple lying, I'm complaining on what I perceive as being several attempts at creating a monopoly, with the iPod/iPhone. We've all blamed Microsoft for doing it in the past, why should Apple receive any other treatment?
If you understood the state of cellular carrier industry before Apple, and if you understood what Apple is trying to change, then you'd be willing to live with some of the limitations until such time that the marketplace is changed.
Let me repeat that but using music and mp3 players: If you understood the state of the music distribution industry (labels) before Apple, and if you understood what Apple was trying to change, then you'd be willing to live with DRM until such time that the marketplace is changed.
I could repeat it again for broadband IP, but the broadband IP market already changed from the days of closed access via AOL and Earthlink, to the IP bit pipe that is your cable or DSL company. (I'm not saying there aren't still challenges here, for example, the net neutrality issue.) This is the goal of Apple with regard to the cell phone market; to change it into a mobile IP market where the cell carrier is just a pipe like the cable or DSL company. (And the AppleTV will work a similar plan against the video distribution industry.) The question is how to get there?
Apple looked at an MVNO (source: Jobs). For what must be economic reasons, an MVNO has always been done with one carrier in an area providing the underlying service. So if Apple was an MVNO, iPhone would be locked to Apple (and its underlying carrier). All the handset revenue would belong to Apple, and the monthly service revenue would be split between Apple and the carrier. Instead of the MVNO, Apple decided to take advantage of the carrier's nationwide marketing and distribution support (since there are less than 200 Apple stores), making public the underlying carrier as AT&T; get them to revise their activation process, add visual voicemail, and unlimited data (but without VoIP and other limitations) at a reasonable price; and revised the split a bit in favor of the carrier (AT&T).
Let's explore what a next step could be. Possibly Apple could get AT&T to allow Voice over the data pipe (VoIP); AT&T could have a plan that charges $100 for unlimited data and VoIP. If AT&T's equipment could reliably measure VoIP usage, then there could be lower-cost plans with limited VoIP minutes. Of course, all this data will require that AT&T build out a bigger pipe (3G and above) nationwide. (Note: AT&T CEO did say they were working on VoIP.) To encourage AT&T to do this, Apple could reduce their monthly revenue share, possibly even to zero. (Note: You can only reduce your share if you have a share in the first place.)
There are lots of other possibilities; I don't presume to know exactly what Apple has in store, but there is much more, and this is just the first step.
Apple has to show AT&T that the revenue they get from cell voice and other services can be dramatically increased if they just charge for unlimited data instead. Because there is a huge market currently paying zero for data (and getting no data and just not yet interested in data). But the iPhone will make them interested in data (Web apps, anyone?)
(Apple has to show the labels that the revenue they get from music downloads can be dramatically increased if they charge a reasonable price for unprotected downloads. Because there is a huge market currently paying zero for digital music.)
Again, this is already in place for broadband IP today (lots of people paying $40+/month for cable/DSL/ broadband that paid zero before (or they paid AOL/Earthlink $20/month)).