Again, as amazing as it may seem, like many members of this forum, I don't live in the rest of the world. I live and work in the USA where 3G availability is very spotty. Only three metro areas in my state have it. However, this is a dramatic expansion of 3G coverage in the year since the iPhone first went on sale. When did 3G reach your home and place of work?
3G is great to have if it is available where you live, work, shop, or go to school. For the vast majority of AT&T customers in the USA, 3G coverage has not yet reached the level of a promise. For subscribers to other service providers, it isn't even a consideration. Why should the vast majority of US MacBook customers pay for something that they cannot use?
Oh, come on. Wi-Fi is 50% faster than 3G--unless you are stealing service from your neighbors in the apartment two doors down.
As a mobile data technology of course, not better that wifi for all applications. But brilliant to be able to have coverage wherever you are and roam between cells seamlessly.
Apple could always have an international model of Macbooks that include different technology for the international market. Just about every other vendor of anything electrical manages to do this fine. Apple's policy of "if its good enough for the US it is good enough for anyone" did certainly contribute to the relatively poor sales of the iphone 1.0 in Europe. It really should have launched with a 3G model in international markets.
I got my first 3G phone in 2002 and started using a 3G card in my laptop in 2004.
Honestly, a macbook air with built in 3G would be a good thing for Apple to release and again in the European market one has to wonder why on earth the the macbook air does not support 3G.
The reason for plastic is that the aluminum reduces the wireless signals. You will notice that a MacBook gets better wireless signal than a MacBook Pro - that is because the MacBook is plastic and the Pro metal.
I agree - screw the tree huggers - go after the real culprits.
I was amazed by the first iPhone. To get a product this right first time round was nothing short of miraculous. It shows just how good Apple has become in figuring out how to combine first-class product design, with state-of-the-art electrical engineering and high quality mass production techniques. it made you kinda wonder what they'd do for an encore.
So here we are, a year down the line and along comes the iPhone 3G. Battery technology has caught-up with 3G technology and a larger capacity battery (that actually makes the iPhone sit better in your hand) along with the faster download capabilities of a 3G mobile chip add significantly greater functionality to it. Longer stand-by/ talk times and faster page loading times are a real bonus. Meanwhile GPS adds another dimension to the iPhone's usefulness while improvements to the software in version 2.0 perfect what was already excellent by smart-phone standards. in short, what we have seen here is a significant ramping up of features and performance.
What's not to like? A number of iPhone fans were disappointed that video calling wasn't added, nor a better camera, nor cut and paste in the software. I guess you can't have everything at once. Adding too many new features at the same time creates a higher risk of something not working as it should. (We all remember iPod batteries not delivering quite the performance we had hoped for.) In fact,Ii am sure these features will be added come the next version in 2009, but the problem is that not everyone wants them. instead, Apple has focused on what matters.
I was disappointed that Apple should choose to make iPhone 3G out of plastic - come on Jonathan (Ive), you're forgetting your usual ruthless attention to perfection. Even the Green Lobby thinks iPhone 3G should be still made of aluminium. I don't give a s**t about a commitment to recycling, i just don't want a phone that shatters if i drop it accidently. But when you consider this choice in more detail, you can see exactly where Apple is headed and the answer is a two-tier model range.
My prediction is that iPhone 3G will become the entry model while a new model (more than likely made out of aluminium again) will arrive offering a better camera, video calling and other cool features. It'll be like MacBook and MacBook Pro. So i think Apple will move to dual product range. I think that could arrive as soon as January 2009.
Any thoughts on this perspective?
To concur with the posts that I'm sure has been made already......the plastic back is totally a technology decision for the ease of the device to make and receive 3G signals. It has nothing to do with style.
You know... I bet a plastic back means it is a whole heck of a lot less likely to slip out of your hand than the aluminum version was. The original iPhone is a slippery bastard!
Comments
Again, as amazing as it may seem, like many members of this forum, I don't live in the rest of the world. I live and work in the USA where 3G availability is very spotty. Only three metro areas in my state have it. However, this is a dramatic expansion of 3G coverage in the year since the iPhone first went on sale. When did 3G reach your home and place of work?
3G is great to have if it is available where you live, work, shop, or go to school. For the vast majority of AT&T customers in the USA, 3G coverage has not yet reached the level of a promise. For subscribers to other service providers, it isn't even a consideration. Why should the vast majority of US MacBook customers pay for something that they cannot use?
Oh, come on. Wi-Fi is 50% faster than 3G--unless you are stealing service from your neighbors in the apartment two doors down.
As a mobile data technology of course, not better that wifi for all applications. But brilliant to be able to have coverage wherever you are and roam between cells seamlessly.
Apple could always have an international model of Macbooks that include different technology for the international market. Just about every other vendor of anything electrical manages to do this fine. Apple's policy of "if its good enough for the US it is good enough for anyone" did certainly contribute to the relatively poor sales of the iphone 1.0 in Europe. It really should have launched with a 3G model in international markets.
I got my first 3G phone in 2002 and started using a 3G card in my laptop in 2004.
Honestly, a macbook air with built in 3G would be a good thing for Apple to release and again in the European market one has to wonder why on earth the the macbook air does not support 3G.
I agree - screw the tree huggers - go after the real culprits.
I was amazed by the first iPhone. To get a product this right first time round was nothing short of miraculous. It shows just how good Apple has become in figuring out how to combine first-class product design, with state-of-the-art electrical engineering and high quality mass production techniques. it made you kinda wonder what they'd do for an encore.
So here we are, a year down the line and along comes the iPhone 3G. Battery technology has caught-up with 3G technology and a larger capacity battery (that actually makes the iPhone sit better in your hand) along with the faster download capabilities of a 3G mobile chip add significantly greater functionality to it. Longer stand-by/ talk times and faster page loading times are a real bonus. Meanwhile GPS adds another dimension to the iPhone's usefulness while improvements to the software in version 2.0 perfect what was already excellent by smart-phone standards. in short, what we have seen here is a significant ramping up of features and performance.
What's not to like? A number of iPhone fans were disappointed that video calling wasn't added, nor a better camera, nor cut and paste in the software. I guess you can't have everything at once. Adding too many new features at the same time creates a higher risk of something not working as it should. (We all remember iPod batteries not delivering quite the performance we had hoped for.) In fact,Ii am sure these features will be added come the next version in 2009, but the problem is that not everyone wants them. instead, Apple has focused on what matters.
I was disappointed that Apple should choose to make iPhone 3G out of plastic - come on Jonathan (Ive), you're forgetting your usual ruthless attention to perfection. Even the Green Lobby thinks iPhone 3G should be still made of aluminium. I don't give a s**t about a commitment to recycling, i just don't want a phone that shatters if i drop it accidently. But when you consider this choice in more detail, you can see exactly where Apple is headed and the answer is a two-tier model range.
My prediction is that iPhone 3G will become the entry model while a new model (more than likely made out of aluminium again) will arrive offering a better camera, video calling and other cool features. It'll be like MacBook and MacBook Pro. So i think Apple will move to dual product range. I think that could arrive as soon as January 2009.
Any thoughts on this perspective?
To concur with the posts that I'm sure has been made already......the plastic back is totally a technology decision for the ease of the device to make and receive 3G signals. It has nothing to do with style.