WSJ's Mossberg says 3G iPhone due in 60 days

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 82
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    When the new 3G comes out, what is involved with upgrading? I would like to give my current iPhone to someone and get the new one. Can the AT&T contract be transfered? Does Apple have to get involved since it is registered through iTunes? Do you swap out the SIM?
  • Reply 42 of 82
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:

    When the new 3G comes out, what is involved with upgrading? I would like to give my current iPhone to someone and get the new one. Can the AT&T contract be transfered? Does Apple have to get involved since it is registered through iTunes? Do you swap out the SIM?



    Your current contract is transfered to the new phone. The person who gets your old iPhone has to sign up for a new 2 year contract.
  • Reply 43 of 82
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


    Your current contract is transfered to the new phone. The person who gets your old iPhone has to sign up for a new 2 year contract.



    I was under the impression that the old contract will be nullified and a new 2 year contract will start.



    Since iTunes will know when you plug in a new iPhone?even if it has the same SIM card?it won't be hard for them to track this info. Surely, if that is the case, a work around will come to pass quickly, but most people on the approved network won't bother with it.
  • Reply 44 of 82
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aresee View Post


    But it takes time to get the approval. Using your May 17th date, and assuming that Apple requested FCC approval mid January 2007, it took the FCC four months to review and approve the iPhone.



    Right, but using your May 17th date, and assuming that Apple requested FCC approval in 1997 it took the FCC 11 years to review and approve the iPhone.



    Isn't it funny what you can do by making a random assumption?
  • Reply 45 of 82
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by smokeonit View Post


    there has to be a fiber optic cable in every neighborhood and people should have the opportunity to hook up to it @ around 100Mbit up/download for around US$40-50... or less! the infrastructure in most places is missing... the urban sprawl is actually what causes this... if people would live closer together it would so much more easy to give them faster access... one fiber optics line for a dense area and the copper lines to give the nice 100/100Mbit BROADBAND... not the crapppy 1.5-6Mbit lines, and 6Mbit if your lucky...!



    So what you're saying is, downloading that pr0n in 12 seconds instead of 45 seconds is worth not having a couple acres of land behind your house, and forcing your kids to deal with gritty urban issues (poverty, lack of green spaces etc) rather than having a nice life in the suburbs? I think your priorities are a little whacked...
  • Reply 46 of 82
    Here are questions to ponder.



    1. How much television content is worth watching more than once?

    2. What kind of content could be developed that people would want to watch more than once or twice?

    3. What is considered to be quality content?



    Out of all of the content, what type of content is someone willing to pay for without commercials?



    My opinion....



    Since I like Seinfeld or some of the classic sitcoms (only a couple out there) that are worth watching more than a few times. I honestly don't get sick of watching a Seinfeld episode and I watch on TV constantly because there is nothing else on, and I enjoy sitting down at a specified time to watch it.



    A quality movie, there are a handful of movies that I can watch more than 5 or 6 times that I still enjoy watching because a lot of the movies on the market just aren't that good to watch once, let alone more than twice. Some movies I love to watch over and over again. What kind of level of quality is enjoyable? laptop screen size? 32 inch TV size? Or 8 foot high definition size?



    How many music concert videos are there on the market that I would enjoy watching? How many educational type shows are there worth watching?



    If there was a site I could watch commercial free content of classic sitcoms, classic movies (not just from 50 years B/W), classic music concert video (jazz artists, classic rock/pop, etc.) as well as edutainment content would be great. I certainly hope someone breaks into a market of just plain quality content that is commercial free....
  • Reply 47 of 82
    areseearesee Posts: 776member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cameronj View Post


    Right, but using your May 17th date, and assuming that Apple requested FCC approval in 1997 it took the FCC 11 years to review and approve the iPhone.



    Isn't it funny what you can do by making a random assumption?



    Eh? What was that about? Nor was my assumption all that random. I assumed that Apple requested FCC approval immediately after the announcement. Solipsism corrected me and showed that Apple waited another two months before requesting approval.



    By the way, your arithmetic is wrong. It's 10 years not 11.
  • Reply 48 of 82
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,720member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ascii View Post


    Now Apple will have to bring the release forward or suffer 2 months of poor sales. Nice one, Walt.



    Ummmm, don't we have a current shortage of iPhones now? How will this cause poor sales of a product in short supply. If anything it potentially buys Apple some goodwill from the people who want a current model iPhone now.
  • Reply 49 of 82
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Not all of them have to paid for by Apple. Certainly there are characters that would befit an iPhone (like McGee on NCIS) or fans of Apple products that just want to use the products because they like them.



    I have to respectfully disagree. Given the slide in ad revenues and the increasing importance of product placement to the broadcasters, I'll wager that no recognizable product shows its face on a show without generating some $$ for the network.

    Call me cynical.
  • Reply 50 of 82
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GQB View Post


    I have to respectfully disagree. Given the slide in ad revenues and the increasing importance of product placement to the broadcasters, I'll wager that no recognizable product shows its face on a show without generating some $$ for the network.

    Call me cynical.



    Even though the iPhone spottings over the past year have often been upside down? I figured the iPhone was used because of its large display that could easily be set by the producers to an image or video to display info that would easily be seen by the audience.
  • Reply 51 of 82
    abster2coreabster2core Posts: 2,501member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aresee View Post


    But it takes time to get the approval. Using your May 17th date, and assuming that Apple requested FCC approval mid January 2007, it took the FCC four months to review and approve the iPhone.



    You are pretty close.



    The first of a series of FCC required tests were started on January 26, 2007. Obviously, the application took a few days at least to process.



    Final (lab) testing was completed and submitted in a final report dated April 19, 2007.



    Naturally, Apple couldn't finalize the User Manual (which is part of the regulatory requirements) until completion and pre-clearance of the Final Report.



    As such, the User Manual was not submitted to the agency until May 11, 2007.



    Six days later, i.e., May 17, 2007, Apple received official notification and go-ahead.
  • Reply 52 of 82
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    The first of a series of FCC tests were started on January 26, 2007. Obviously, the application took a few days at least to process.



    Where do you get this date from? FCC's site lists the submission date as 09-MAR-2007.
  • Reply 53 of 82
    abster2coreabster2core Posts: 2,501member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GQB View Post


    I have to respectfully disagree. Given the slide in ad revenues and the increasing importance of product placement to the broadcasters, I'll wager that no recognizable product shows its face on a show without generating some $$ for the network.

    Call me cynical.



    It is a two-way street.



    Commissioning ad placements is one-thing. Some products buy their placement in movies and TV shows, some pay nothing. Producers love it either way, especially if it means they don't have to expend moneys on set configurations.



    Then there are those, were the mere mention of a highly recognizable product commands audience interests and retention. Just Jay Leno joking about the iPhone will guarantee to hold the audience a few seconds longer. Other sponsors would surely welcome being associated in the same room with the iPhone.



    One of the greatest advertising sluffs by Johnny Carson on the late show led to a massive free advertising bonanza for Uncle Ben's Condensed Rice. He introduced it by calling it Uncle Ben's Condemned Rice. It was on the morning shows for days and freely apologized for by Johnny (with Ed's help) for late nights to come. Again other sponsors would die to get such attention.
  • Reply 54 of 82
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    One of the greatest advertising sluffs by Johnny Carson on the late show led to a massive free advertising bonanza for Uncle Ben's Condensed Rice.



    Don't forget the great toilet paper shortage of 73, set in motion by a joke by Carson on December 19th, 1973.
    Of course, Johnny, like most talk show hosts, had a staff that helped write his monologue. His writers had heard earlier in the day about a Wisconsin congressman named Harold Froehlich. Froelich claimed that the federal government was falling behind in getting bids to supply toilet paper and that "The United States may face a serious shortage of toilet tissue within a few months".



    His writers decided to include a joke based on this quote in Carson's monologue. He said "You know what's disappearing from the supermarket shelves? Toilet paper. There's an acute shortage of toilet paper in the United States."



    Too bad they couldn't see the consequence of this statement. You may not be aware if you are young, but the early 1970's was a time of shortages - oil in particular. The next morning, many of the 20 million television viewers ran to the supermarket and bought all the toilet paper they could find. By noon, most of the stores were out of stock! Stores tried to ration the stuff, but they couldn't keep up with demand.



    Johnny Carson went on the air several nights later and explained that there was no shortage and apologized for scaring the public. Unfortunately, people saw all the empty shelves in the stores, so the stampede continued.



    Scott Paper showed video of their plants in full production to the public and asked them to stay calm - there was no shortage. The video was of little help. The panic fed itself and continued.



    They finally got the shelves restocked three weeks later and the shortage was over.


    (source)
  • Reply 55 of 82
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gloss View Post


    I'll give you two guesses what pays for those TV shows you're watching.



    I am just old enough to remember when cable hit my neighborhood. When it was launched, the subscriber fee was to allow commercial free television, unlike the free OTA programming from our roof top antenna. It didn't last long, once the big four went came to cable. It is kind of like the tolls on the bridges/tunnels were supposed to end once the bridge/tunnel was paid for. Or the same situation with satellite radio today. Sooner or later greed will prevail and all the channels will have commercials.

    And I realize this may be off-topic, but the cable that runs through my neighborhood hasn't been updated since the dawn of time, yet my cable bill is $70 a month. The internet--same cable...$45 a month.....and wait for it...the phone, on the same cable, is an extra $30 a month. With taxes and "fees", my bill is nearly $170 a month for Optimum's triple play. I think for the status of our infrastructure, that we are being robbed due to the overabundance of monopolies in this country (The U.S.).



    So to sum up, competition would be good and monopolies==bad.
  • Reply 56 of 82
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    I was under the impression that the old contract will be nullified and a new 2 year contract will start.



    Nope AT&T confirmed your contract will transfer to the new phone.
  • Reply 57 of 82
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GQB View Post


    I have to respectfully disagree. Given the slide in ad revenues and the increasing importance of product placement to the broadcasters, I'll wager that no recognizable product shows its face on a show without generating some $$ for the network.

    Call me cynical.



    Their was an article on this awhile ago. Apple doesn't pay for product placement.
  • Reply 58 of 82
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post


    Walt says he'd be okay with paying $1.99 for shows without commercial interruption but has anyone done the math with regards to what sitcoms, sporting events, whatever you happen to be watching on tv right now costs and what they get for those commercials? If commercials cover the cost of a sitcom or sporting event, will $1.99 cover it or will it have to be even higher?



    This cost is really important, I'd love to see someone work it out correctly.



    Since I can't find it... I'll do some LOOSE calculations.



    So it costs $300,000 to show one 30second ad on Heroes.

    There are about 17 minutes of ads per show... that's 34 ads or $10 million dollars earned from all the ads in the show.

    Heroes draws about 14 million viewers - so that's about 75c per viewer.



    ie: Apple could pay NBC 75c/viewer, or the advertisers can pay NBC 75c/viewer. It wouldn't make any difference to NBC.



    (However... I would assume that If Nike pays NBC to put on an ad nationwide, then NBC pays some of that to the local network affiliate. I'm not sure how that all works...)



    There's always at least one viewer... sometimes 4 or 5. I'd guess the average would be about 2. That's $1.50 per view. Of course, Apple has overheads. So do the local network affiliates. How much for either?



    http://www.frankwbaker.com/prime_tim...c_ad_costs.htm

    http://www.heroestheseries.com/heroe...onday-ratings/



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post


    Plus what about new shows? Some shows are a hit shortly after they air while others takes time to build a loyal audience to bear economical fruit for the producers. If not enough $1.99's come in, would a show that might have potential later, be killed off before it ever got the chance to live



    Yeah, it's much easier to build a new audience when the show is free. And until an audience is built where's it going to make money. This is a problem with the existing model too, of course, since a new show has fewer viewers until it builds a following, so ads are worth less and the network doesn't get the return it wants at first.



    But there are other models.

    .... Mossberg is right that only a small proportion of ads are relevant to any given viewer. If Apple (or anyone) could find a way of showing the same NBC ads (for example), but just the 1-in-8 that's most relevant to each viewer, I believe that this would be attractive to many advertisers.



    Perhaps there's room for a model where we watch for free, in exchange for seeing 1 relevant ad every commercial break.
  • Reply 59 of 82
    abster2coreabster2core Posts: 2,501member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Where do you get this date from? FCC's site lists the submission date as 09-MAR-2007.



    It's in the final report.
  • Reply 60 of 82
    icibaquicibaqu Posts: 278member
    i have a hard time figuring out why this Walt Mossberg thing (about the iPhone) is any sort of major revelation. Ignoring for a second the 1) reported supply shortages/ unavailability of iPhone in Apple's flagship stores (like NYC), 2) analyst predictions, 3) At&t saying all their smartphones will be 3G about June....



    let's just look at the fact that Apple has a DEVELOPER'S CONFERENCE at the same time they are releasing an SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT KIT for their new mobile platform, and it is conveniently a year since they released the original iPhone. They damn well better be releasing a new iPhone at that time, or they stupid (and DOOMED!)
Sign In or Register to comment.