With the confidence in sales numbers from Apple and now this, I think we're looking at more then one phone. Even if the 3G iphone doubles memory, has GPS, and is the same price or cheaper, I don't see that alone pushing sales numbers.
I'm starting to believe the nano phone rumors.
The SDK, 2.0 and Enterprise features? A new generation of even more ridiculous manufacturing processes (zirconia cases)?
They can add incredible amounts of utility and marketability with just a couple mindblowingly simple apps that do who knows what.
And why is the iPhone nano a remote possibility to anyone right now? That Taiwanese rag 'reported' Hon Hai got a contract to work on devices with screens @ 2.8". It's unlikely anyone responsible for editing or fact-checking that story has used the iPhone. Owners are definitely wiser to the fact that the CocoaTouch UI would probably stop being as fun to use if every button, keyboard key and interface widget was 20% smaller.
Zoom in all the way on a dense region in Maps.app and observe how fine the text is. You cannot shrink the street names any smaller, and there isn't a known mechanism in the SDK to explode typeface scales for different screen sizes (right?). This version of mobile OS X is not resolution independent; 320x480 in a screen smaller by a double digit percentage would be painful for usability.
The SDK, 2.0 and Enterprise features? A new generation of even more ridiculous manufacturing processes (zirconia cases)?
They can add incredible amounts of utility and marketability with just a couple mindblowingly simple apps that do who knows what.
And why is the iPhone nano a remote possibility to anyone right now? That Taiwanese rag 'reported' Hon Hai got a contract to work on devices with screens @ 2.8". It's unlikely anyone responsible for editing or fact-checking that story has used the iPhone. Owners are definitely wiser to the fact that the CocoaTouch UI would probably stop being as fun to use if every button, keyboard key and interface widget was 20% smaller.
Zoom in all the way on a dense region in Maps.app and observe how fine the text is. You cannot shrink the street names any smaller, and there isn't a known mechanism in the SDK to explode typeface scales for different screen sizes (right?). This version of mobile OS X is not resolution independent; 320x480 in a screen smaller by a double digit percentage would be painful for usability.
I still don't see the Enterprise features creating such confidence from both AT&T and Apple. I maybe wrong.
An iPhone mini/nano, would be VERY different then the iPhone we know now. I would suspect that instead of a qwerty keyboard, it would use the standard phone number pad for texting. It would be a basic phone and iPod. It may have email and browser but very little else.
Anywho, as long as the update supports 3G I'll be upgrading.
Comments
With the confidence in sales numbers from Apple and now this, I think we're looking at more then one phone. Even if the 3G iphone doubles memory, has GPS, and is the same price or cheaper, I don't see that alone pushing sales numbers.
I'm starting to believe the nano phone rumors.
The SDK, 2.0 and Enterprise features? A new generation of even more ridiculous manufacturing processes (zirconia cases)?
They can add incredible amounts of utility and marketability with just a couple mindblowingly simple apps that do who knows what.
And why is the iPhone nano a remote possibility to anyone right now? That Taiwanese rag 'reported' Hon Hai got a contract to work on devices with screens @ 2.8". It's unlikely anyone responsible for editing or fact-checking that story has used the iPhone. Owners are definitely wiser to the fact that the CocoaTouch UI would probably stop being as fun to use if every button, keyboard key and interface widget was 20% smaller.
Zoom in all the way on a dense region in Maps.app and observe how fine the text is. You cannot shrink the street names any smaller, and there isn't a known mechanism in the SDK to explode typeface scales for different screen sizes (right?). This version of mobile OS X is not resolution independent; 320x480 in a screen smaller by a double digit percentage would be painful for usability.
Do all iPhones have the same cellular radios in them, or are they localized for country/region?
Sorry for being offtop, and thanks
A bit off topic, but I'd like to know-
Do all iPhones have the same cellular radios in them, or are they localized for country/region?
Sorry for being offtop, and thanks
It's been the same one.
The SDK, 2.0 and Enterprise features? A new generation of even more ridiculous manufacturing processes (zirconia cases)?
They can add incredible amounts of utility and marketability with just a couple mindblowingly simple apps that do who knows what.
And why is the iPhone nano a remote possibility to anyone right now? That Taiwanese rag 'reported' Hon Hai got a contract to work on devices with screens @ 2.8". It's unlikely anyone responsible for editing or fact-checking that story has used the iPhone. Owners are definitely wiser to the fact that the CocoaTouch UI would probably stop being as fun to use if every button, keyboard key and interface widget was 20% smaller.
Zoom in all the way on a dense region in Maps.app and observe how fine the text is. You cannot shrink the street names any smaller, and there isn't a known mechanism in the SDK to explode typeface scales for different screen sizes (right?). This version of mobile OS X is not resolution independent; 320x480 in a screen smaller by a double digit percentage would be painful for usability.
I still don't see the Enterprise features creating such confidence from both AT&T and Apple. I maybe wrong.
An iPhone mini/nano, would be VERY different then the iPhone we know now. I would suspect that instead of a qwerty keyboard, it would use the standard phone number pad for texting. It would be a basic phone and iPod. It may have email and browser but very little else.
Anywho, as long as the update supports 3G I'll be upgrading.