Apple announced the iPhone five months early so that the FCC wouldn't trump their announcement. I think that the final approval for the iPhone was at the beginning of June, so it really did take five months to approve.
It is true that the FCC had posted the results only a couple months before. I think it was six months because MWSF was the best time to announce it to get the best bang for the marketing effort, that's when even a lot of non-Mac people notice what Apple announces. MWSF and WWDC are the two major events. WWDC is too late, so MWSF is the best time to promote it. I think they also said that they wanted people to keep their product in mind so that more people have time to let their contract lapse. I think Apple is seeing the light that sometimes it's a good idea to let people know what you have ahead of time, the amount of buzz they got probably couldn't have been done with their previous tendencies to keep things secret until it's released.
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggsjm
Why is AT&T an 'evil empire'?
the "new" AT&T is nothing but four original RBOCs (Soutwestern Bell, Pacific Bell, South Central Bell and Ameritech).
Many don't realize this, but Verizon was part of the "Evil Empire" once too. They were an RBOC (regional bell operating company).
The AT&T that you are referring to (the one that was broken up in 1984) died a slow an painful death. Its demise was final when SBC purchased it in 2003.
I don't think any one of the 4 major Wireless providers is necessarily bad or good.
I don't think it matters if the current AT&T is the old AT&T or not.
All the major carriers significant problems somewhere, and poor customer service, sell bad and crippled phones at exorbitant prices and try to exert an IMO unjustifiable level of lock-in with longer contracts in order to get less than outrageous service rates.
Conceived as a scaled back, lower cost alternative to today's iPhone, the second iteration of the handset is presumed to marry iPod functionality with rudimentary cellular capabilities. More resource-heavy Internet browsing and e-mail capabilities are not expected of the device.
In providing the first visual descriptions of the handset, long-standing industry sources -- who've continually been in tune with Apple's future music directions -- have dubbed the device "an iPhone nano" because they say it best describes the the handset's overall form-factor and aesthetic.
Well going by what was just said here, I think the click wheel phone patent is just another defensive patent, and iPhone nano, as I see it, will be closer to this design:
Nice reaction. Some folks want a nice phone and audio/video device. Others want a portable laptop in the palm of their hands that is a phone, audio/video player.
It's smart.
Yeah, I just bought an iPhone, I have no problem whatsoever with Apple releasing, say, a smaller, slimmer $299 iPhone with little or no browsing/e-mail capabilities and a much smaller, non-touchscreen.
And please watch your language on these boards. We have many younger members.
LOL you didn't have to quote him word for word and make it permanent (until you edit it).
I honestly feel apple is strapped as it is. They are extremely far behind on the money machine (ipod) and other devices. They may be looking at new designs for the iphone family but the way things have been going for hardware development, I don't see it happening any time soon. It would be nice if they got them out by the holiday, but I feel this is wishful thinking at this point in time.
All my friends at Apple are working their ass off. To the point where they don't have ANY time for their family or to barely chat. I have been offered jobs at Apple, and this is the #1 reason I won't work there. Everyone is spread so thin there.
I say Apple needs to get back to other hardware for a while until it's reved, then go back to the iPhone deal.
Well, I could see a low cost iPod that's a phone, but without a keypad or multitouch, I don't see how you'd do text messaging on it. I can't imagine they'd sell many if it doesn't support text messaging. A keypad doesn't seem very Apple-like, and if you add multi-touch ... well, you're basically back to the hardware of the current iPhone (which equals similar cost).
The logic just doesn't seem to be there, unless you want a really watered down phone that's mostly an iPod.
... in which a staggering array of gadgets from the Cupertino-based firm is expected to leave would-be rivals confused and unable to react.
Hopefully the staggering array won't leave would-be customers confused and unable to react!
I think that a lower-priced, less-fully-functioned option will be welcomed by many people. I see a lot of negative comments here about the hypothetical iPhone Nano, but I think people are focusing too intensely on the word 'Nano'.
To me, an iPod Nano is a smaller iPod. (My son has one, and he loves it.) So . . . an iPhone Nano would just be a smaller iPhone. No one is saying that it has to look anything at all like an iPod Nano -- like the mock-up we saw a few days ago.
It could be a great product. I bet a lot of students would get them. It's got to be hard for a HS or college kid to shell out $599 for a phone (or get their parents to do said shelling).
I do hope, like many others on this forum, that Apple's phone business doesn't distract them from their other product lines too much. I'd like to see a MBP update!
I wrote in this very forum last year that this would be the way to do it. People laughed at me and said I was crazy. Crazy like a Steve, I guess.
Unfortunately, this won't increase the iPhone market to include me. So long as it remains AT&T, I'm not getting one, period. Dammit, Apple, where's that stinkin' widescreen Video iPod with WiFi and Safari?
The story said it would be more widely available.
Perhaps, if it doesn't do the Visual email feature it will be available from other networks as well.
Well, I could see a low cost iPod that's a phone, but without a keypad or multitouch, I don't see how you'd do text messaging on it. I can't imagine they'd sell many if it doesn't support text messaging. A keypad doesn't seem very Apple-like, and if you add multi-touch ... well, you're basically back to the hardware of the current iPhone (which equals similar cost).
The logic just doesn't seem to be there, unless you want a really watered down phone that's mostly an iPod.
Totally agree. Everyone I know does minimal text messaging these days and I am 47 years old and not a techie. So someone please tell us how text messaging would work on the various mocked up iPhone nanos. Thanks.
[QUOTE=AppleInsider;1114000]Apple Inc. this fall plans to accelerate its assault on the 1 billion unit worldwide cell phone market with a second incarnation of its iPhone handset that will likely appeal to an even larger audience, AppleInsider has learned. /QUOTE]
Appleinsider makes CNET headline with this article! Appleinsider is DOOOOMED!!!!
Actually, I don't think the specs for this iPhone "nano" are that unreasonable. Add voice dialing and I think it would be a mega-hit, not detracting from iPhone but cannibalizing the iPod Nano. I see a lot of MP3 players on my gym floor, and a lot of guys checking their cell phones in the locker room (not taking them onto the floor).
What I wonder about is the timing. Before Thanksgiving for the "holiday" season would be very aggressive on Apple's part.
And as for the virtual click wheel, you don't need it. Even without voice dialing, you could use the standard click wheel to enter numbers to dial the same way you unlock the ipod.
And please watch your language on these boards. We have many younger members. ?Kasper
Younger members? Like how old? Four? Have you had an opportunity lately to listen to a group of teenagers talking among themselves? Every other word is unprintable. Get real!
And please watch your language on these boards. We have many younger members. ?Kasper
Younger members? Like how old? Four? Have you had an opportunity lately to listen to a group of teenagers talking among themselves? Every other word is unprintable. Get real!
Comments
okay, I'll bite.
Apple announced the iPhone five months early so that the FCC wouldn't trump their announcement. I think that the final approval for the iPhone was at the beginning of June, so it really did take five months to approve.
It is true that the FCC had posted the results only a couple months before. I think it was six months because MWSF was the best time to announce it to get the best bang for the marketing effort, that's when even a lot of non-Mac people notice what Apple announces. MWSF and WWDC are the two major events. WWDC is too late, so MWSF is the best time to promote it. I think they also said that they wanted people to keep their product in mind so that more people have time to let their contract lapse. I think Apple is seeing the light that sometimes it's a good idea to let people know what you have ahead of time, the amount of buzz they got probably couldn't have been done with their previous tendencies to keep things secret until it's released.
Why is AT&T an 'evil empire'?
the "new" AT&T is nothing but four original RBOCs (Soutwestern Bell, Pacific Bell, South Central Bell and Ameritech).
Many don't realize this, but Verizon was part of the "Evil Empire" once too. They were an RBOC (regional bell operating company).
The AT&T that you are referring to (the one that was broken up in 1984) died a slow an painful death. Its demise was final when SBC purchased it in 2003.
I don't think any one of the 4 major Wireless providers is necessarily bad or good.
I don't think it matters if the current AT&T is the old AT&T or not.
All the major carriers significant problems somewhere, and poor customer service, sell bad and crippled phones at exorbitant prices and try to exert an IMO unjustifiable level of lock-in with longer contracts in order to get less than outrageous service rates.
Conceived as a scaled back, lower cost alternative to today's iPhone, the second iteration of the handset is presumed to marry iPod functionality with rudimentary cellular capabilities. More resource-heavy Internet browsing and e-mail capabilities are not expected of the device.
In providing the first visual descriptions of the handset, long-standing industry sources -- who've continually been in tune with Apple's future music directions -- have dubbed the device "an iPhone nano" because they say it best describes the the handset's overall form-factor and aesthetic.
Well going by what was just said here, I think the click wheel phone patent is just another defensive patent, and iPhone nano, as I see it, will be closer to this design:
Multi-touch is the new click wheel.
Nice reaction. Some folks want a nice phone and audio/video device. Others want a portable laptop in the palm of their hands that is a phone, audio/video player.
It's smart.
Yeah, I just bought an iPhone, I have no problem whatsoever with Apple releasing, say, a smaller, slimmer $299 iPhone with little or no browsing/e-mail capabilities and a much smaller, non-touchscreen.
If this is true, it's very smart.
And please watch your language on these boards. We have many younger members.
LOL you didn't have to quote him word for word and make it permanent (until you edit it).
I honestly feel apple is strapped as it is. They are extremely far behind on the money machine (ipod) and other devices. They may be looking at new designs for the iphone family but the way things have been going for hardware development, I don't see it happening any time soon. It would be nice if they got them out by the holiday, but I feel this is wishful thinking at this point in time.
All my friends at Apple are working their ass off. To the point where they don't have ANY time for their family or to barely chat. I have been offered jobs at Apple, and this is the #1 reason I won't work there. Everyone is spread so thin there.
I say Apple needs to get back to other hardware for a while until it's reved, then go back to the iPhone deal.
The logic just doesn't seem to be there, unless you want a really watered down phone that's mostly an iPod.
... in which a staggering array of gadgets from the Cupertino-based firm is expected to leave would-be rivals confused and unable to react.
Hopefully the staggering array won't leave would-be customers confused and unable to react!
I think that a lower-priced, less-fully-functioned option will be welcomed by many people. I see a lot of negative comments here about the hypothetical iPhone Nano, but I think people are focusing too intensely on the word 'Nano'.
To me, an iPod Nano is a smaller iPod. (My son has one, and he loves it.) So . . . an iPhone Nano would just be a smaller iPhone. No one is saying that it has to look anything at all like an iPod Nano -- like the mock-up we saw a few days ago.
It could be a great product. I bet a lot of students would get them. It's got to be hard for a HS or college kid to shell out $599 for a phone (or get their parents to do said shelling).
I do hope, like many others on this forum, that Apple's phone business doesn't distract them from their other product lines too much. I'd like to see a MBP update!
I wrote in this very forum last year that this would be the way to do it. People laughed at me and said I was crazy. Crazy like a Steve, I guess.
Unfortunately, this won't increase the iPhone market to include me. So long as it remains AT&T, I'm not getting one, period. Dammit, Apple, where's that stinkin' widescreen Video iPod with WiFi and Safari?
The story said it would be more widely available.
Perhaps, if it doesn't do the Visual email feature it will be available from other networks as well.
Well, I could see a low cost iPod that's a phone, but without a keypad or multitouch, I don't see how you'd do text messaging on it. I can't imagine they'd sell many if it doesn't support text messaging. A keypad doesn't seem very Apple-like, and if you add multi-touch ... well, you're basically back to the hardware of the current iPhone (which equals similar cost).
The logic just doesn't seem to be there, unless you want a really watered down phone that's mostly an iPod.
Totally agree. Everyone I know does minimal text messaging these days and I am 47 years old and not a techie. So someone please tell us how text messaging would work on the various mocked up iPhone nanos. Thanks.
Ummm, I guess that's cool, but since when did apple become nokia? I want to see some goddamn MACS.
Macs???
Macs???
next product will be iFridge, it will re-order milk and beer for you automatically from iTunes Mega store ...
where is the iMac???????
iPod Nano + basic Phone = iPhone Nano, it will sell like hot cakes with right storage in it. (but again locked with AT&T?)
who knows iPod nano may be discontinued or offered in one variety.
next product will be iFridge, it will re-order milk and beer for you automatically from iTunes Mega store ...
where is the iMac???????
iPod Nano + basic Phone = iPhone Nano, it will sell like hot cakes with right storage in it. (but again locked with AT&T?)
who knows iPod nano may be discontinued or offered in one variety.
The fridge has already been demonstrated, but not by Apple.
Appleinsider makes CNET headline with this article! Appleinsider is DOOOOMED!!!!
Actually, I don't think the specs for this iPhone "nano" are that unreasonable. Add voice dialing and I think it would be a mega-hit, not detracting from iPhone but cannibalizing the iPod Nano. I see a lot of MP3 players on my gym floor, and a lot of guys checking their cell phones in the locker room (not taking them onto the floor).
What I wonder about is the timing. Before Thanksgiving for the "holiday" season would be very aggressive on Apple's part.
And as for the virtual click wheel, you don't need it. Even without voice dialing, you could use the standard click wheel to enter numbers to dial the same way you unlock the ipod.
Younger members? Like how old? Four? Have you had an opportunity lately to listen to a group of teenagers talking among themselves? Every other word is unprintable. Get real!
And please watch your language on these boards. We have many younger members. ?Kasper
Younger members? Like how old? Four? Have you had an opportunity lately to listen to a group of teenagers talking among themselves? Every other word is unprintable. Get real!
That's tellin' im!
[url=http://www.freesmileys.org]
Please Mel, this is a family website.
Ummm, I guess that's cool, but since when did apple become nokia? I want to see some goddamn MACS.
You'll find them in System Profiler.
Please Mel, this is a family website.
Your family doesn't like the moonlight?
Believe me, there's far worse on prime time Tv. And that's IN the States, once you get out...
Your family doesn't like the moonlight?
Believe me, there's far worse on prime time Tv. And that's IN the States, once you get out...
Just ribbing you. No offense taken here.
Just ribbing you. No offense taken here.
I sort of figured, but...