iPhone to sport metal casing and virtual click-wheel?

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 58
    eckingecking Posts: 1,588member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dancm2000


    This is an odd time to introduce a new phone. The idea of a cell phone tower is fading technology. Soon these towers will be converted to broadband internet towers, a la Wimax, and you'll be using VoIP software to make ALL calls. Apple, and everyone else, knows this.



    But the infrastructure isnt there yet for iChat (VoIP) only phone, so they need to do something in the meantime for bandwidth. I dont think they can keep putting the iPhone off either. Otherwise the iPhone becomes the Zune.... late. This guy thinks apple is going to go ESPN route and buy bandwidth:



    http://ce.seekingalpha.com/article/22383 (also linked on macnn.com)



    I would think Apple would do better to make a deal with the carriers. As long as verizon has proved that they understand the basic concepts of math. (verizonmath is a hilarious site) Still, we won't see what Apple can really do until the infrastructure is there for a true VoIP type mobile phone.



    That may be, but the end user doesn't know that it's waiting for new tech. Appl has to act now whether or not they want to because more and more people are getting into music phones, no matter how under functional and useless most of them may be.
  • Reply 22 of 58
    This phone needs to start riots when it comes out. Anything short of that and it will be considered a failure. But what amazes me is that this "phone" has generated more publicity than any other phone that actually exists. Think about that for one second? Then again, we've all been duped by vaporware, but this can't be called vaporware since Apple has never confirmed/denied that they're working on one.



    And then you have the Microsoft tactic, which is to release a 1.0 product ASAP, then talk about how it's going to rule NEXT YEAR. It's like those signs I always see at bars: FREE BEER TOMORROW.
  • Reply 23 of 58
    Who in God's name would spend $600 for a phone. That's ridiculous. I think even hardcore Apple fans will raise an eyebrow at that.



    I think they'll need to label it something other than a "phone" in order for it to sell. They'll need some kind of catchy vague name and it'll need to do everything - phone, camera, music, photos, video, email, chat, calendar, appt. book, etc.



    Then, maybe, you'll be able to get rich people to purchase enough to drive the price down.
  • Reply 24 of 58
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider


    From her checks, the analyst believes the iPhone will sport a metal casing design similar to the iPod nano and be available in "multiple colors including black, white, silver and possibly others."



    Here's the give away. The analyst know Apple's signature colour is white, with black and silver popular alternatives for varying brands. She knows the nano, Apple's most popular iPod, is made of metal. They must go together.



    When has Apple ever made something where the metal was WHITE?



    She's working off available info to make a prediction (which is fine and what analysts are meant to do). Unfortunately, she didn't spend enough time looking at the info leading to the mistake about the colour. This exposes the fact that she doesn't have inside info, merely publicly available info which she was too careless to examine properly.
  • Reply 25 of 58
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by thadgarrison


    Who in God's name would spend $600 for a phone. That's ridiculous. I think even hardcore Apple fans will raise an eyebrow at that.



    I think they'll need to label it something other than a "phone" in order for it to sell. They'll need some kind of catchy vague name and it'll need to do everything - phone, camera, music, photos, video, email, chat, calendar, appt. book, etc.



    Then, maybe, you'll be able to get rich people to purchase enough to drive the price down.



    This analyst is way off base...unless Apple has actually devised a tiny phone that you swallow like a pill, which then attaches to your brain stem to scan for thoughts of placing phone calls.



    On the other hand, can this analyst be fired for sheer stupidity?
  • Reply 26 of 58
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dancm2000


    This is an odd time to introduce a new phone. The idea of a cell phone tower is fading technology. Soon these towers will be converted to broadband internet towers, a la Wimax, and you'll be using VoIP software to make ALL calls. Apple, and everyone else, knows this.



    IP is a bad way of delivering voice. The information in voice conversations must be delivered sequentially, and IP was not designed to do that. You will never see VoIP replace technoligies that were designed from the beginning to deliver voice.
  • Reply 27 of 58
    ahmen! VoIP is a nice alternative, but it will never relpace legacy Telephony.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Denton


    IP is a bad way of delivering voice. The information in voice conversations must be delivered sequentially, and IP was not designed to do that. You will never see VoIP replace technoligies that were designed from the beginning to deliver voice.



  • Reply 28 of 58
    vinney57vinney57 Posts: 1,162member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by thadgarrison


    Who in God's name would spend $600 for a phone. That's ridiculous. I think even hardcore Apple fans will raise an eyebrow at that.



    I think they'll need to label it something other than a "phone" in order for it to sell. They'll need some kind of catchy vague name and it'll need to do everything - phone, camera, music, photos, video, email, chat, calendar, appt. book, etc.



    Then, maybe, you'll be able to get rich people to purchase enough to drive the price down.



    Maybe you should wait until THE FUCKING PRODUCT EXISTS.
  • Reply 29 of 58
    rickagrickag Posts: 1,626member
    This is the Future Hardware forum, I think?
  • Reply 30 of 58
    I agree with the poster with $600 being too much for a phone. He was only commenting on the speculation of the product that every analysts seem to know but not know what it is.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinney57


    Maybe you should wait until THE FUCKING PRODUCT EXISTS.



    If they can sell it as a MP3 player/phone/video player, I can see them selling it at that price. Now that I think about it, I paid 350.00 for my current smartphone with a contract. So 600 for a phone minus a contract sounds about right.\
  • Reply 31 of 58
    mactelmactel Posts: 1,275member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nufase


    Seems a bit too $$ to me. Unless that is the unlocked no contract price.



    But I'm a bit hesitant to believe anything that someone with a name like "Rebecca Runkle" has to say.



    This report shouts fake to me.





    Yep, if it isn't free with a service plan then I don't want it!
  • Reply 32 of 58
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacTel


    Yep, if it isn't free with a service plan then I don't want it!



    Seriously, we all want the all-in-one device, but if it means $600 then I'll just continue duct taping my Nano to my Moto L2.
  • Reply 33 of 58
    slewisslewis Posts: 2,081member
    Um... I just said WiMax was an option, not a sure thing.
  • Reply 34 of 58
    This "phone" will likely be a great first step towards the soon-to-be day when everyone carries a SINGLE device that is a phone, a PDA, a camera, a BlackBerry, a video camera/player, a music player, a game player, and an information retrieval/storage device. And it will HAVE to be stylish, light, small, and give you access to Everything, Everywhere. And it be a must-have item with a no-contract price much, much higher than the reduced price that ALL phones now have when you sign up with a provider. $600 will seem CHEAP! The cellular providers (Cingular, Verizon, etc) have the networks in place to do this. I think Apple is just recognizing the days of the independent MP3 player are numbered.
  • Reply 35 of 58
    There was a article that quoted SJ as saying, "I believe that smartphones are the only viable challengers to the iPod." I think this is true. I've made the jump from iPod to smartphone.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mikeben


    This "phone" will likely be a great first step towards the soon-to-be day when everyone carries a SINGLE device that is a phone, a PDA, a camera, a BlackBerry, a video camera/player, a music player, a game player, and an information retrieval/storage device. And it will HAVE to be stylish, light, small, and give you access to Everything, Everywhere. And it be a must-have item with a no-contract price much, much higher than the reduced price that ALL phones now have when you sign up with a provider. $600 will seem CHEAP! The cellular providers (Cingular, Verizon, etc) have the networks in place to do this. I think Apple is just recognizing the days of the independent MP3 player are numbered.



  • Reply 36 of 58
    irelandireland Posts: 17,798member
    I'm having trouble waiting for this/these phone(s), I know i'll just have to wait, but for such a long wait this better be done right. It's been in concept since at least 2002 (possibly since iPhone.org/'99), so lets hope the boys over at coop intend to impress me.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider


    Also likely, but not confirmed, are email and calendar functionality, she said.



    Come on.. If this phone doesn't have a calander I'll get sick.



    Don't know why I'm adding this here, but I got a Wii, with 2 Wiimotes
  • Reply 37 of 58
    I just want to start a side thread about quantum computers. I know they don't exist yet, but I want to challenge some information I've heard about what they can do and what they can't do.



    First of all, this new quantum computer should have lots of RAM. Like 600,000 TB. Also, it should be a 16-CPU system, no less.



    Additionally, if it's priced over $24,000, that's BS. They need to target this computer to be around $12,000, because, honestly, who would pay more for a quantum computer? Nobody.



    It should have a calendar, spreadsheet, word processing, and built-in video games. Not to mention, four cameras (for 3-D video conferencing), and a Ultra Blu-Ray optical drive (which hasn't been invented yet, but they should start and it should cost no more than $1,330).



    The quantum computer's case should be hot pink with polka-dots, although in reality we should be able to design our case online since we're paying alot for it.



    I know the quantum computer hasn't even been announced, but I just want to get the mouths working on this since we're all expert armchair analysts (look at our work on the unannounced iPhone!) who know exactly what the world needs!
  • Reply 38 of 58
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macinthe408


    I just want to start a side thread about quantum computers. I know they don't exist yet, but I want to challenge some information I've heard about what they can do and what they can't do.



    First of all, this new quantum computer should have lots of RAM. Like 600,000 TB. Also, it should be a 16-CPU system, no less.



    Additionally, if it's priced over $24,000, that's BS. They need to target this computer to be around $12,000, because, honestly, who would pay more for a quantum computer? Nobody.



    It should have a calendar, spreadsheet, word processing, and built-in video games. Not to mention, four cameras (for 3-D video conferencing), and a Ultra Blu-Ray optical drive (which hasn't been invented yet, but they should start and it should cost no more than $1,330).



    The quantum computer's case should be hot pink with polka-dots, although in reality we should be able to design our case online since we're paying alot for it.



    I know the quantum computer hasn't even been announced, but I just want to get the mouths working on this since we're all expert armchair analysts (look at our work on the unannounced iPhone!) who know exactly what the world needs!



  • Reply 39 of 58
    junkiejunkie Posts: 122member
    1) I think people are trashing this report for no reason. These are all reasonable predictions and for as much as you may criticize her, Ms Runkle has found a way to get paid for doing what you all are doing for free - so cheers to her.



    2) Part of the mixed up reports in my opinion might be confusion about 2 devices. One being a new full sized ipod with one side being a full 16:9-ish display for video. The other being an iPod phone with a size in between the current iPod and nano.



    Now for the iPod I would make a reasonable guess that this will be a GSM-type device, so Cingular is probably to most likely partner if there is one. Verizon Sprint would not be an option.



    Second, I personally think that Apple will have a camera in these which will allow mobile video conferences between devices and between people who are on iChat. This will explain why for a while now all new macs have a video camera in the display.



    Third, this iChat integration will be just one form of .mac integration which will further include address-book sync.



    Those are my prediction based on my own isolated speculation - not having talked to anyone inside.
  • Reply 40 of 58
    Err, as much excitement there seems to be for this product, I doubt Apple would price this unit that high. Maybe she meant a new mac mini in metal case. Regardless, I have a contract with my current carrier, and unless I can use the iPhone with my carrier during that time I won't be buying it regardless of price until at least it's up. Go with a crappy carrier and it's also out. I love the idea of a phone done by Apple, but it's gotta work with me.
Sign In or Register to comment.