Video recording would be nice. Tethering is definitely one I'd like to see too. I'd also love to see mass storage mode implemented on the iPhone/iPod touch - not for music transfer, just so I can carry files around easily.
My top feature request though is the ability to download podcasts directly to the iPhone. I've got a fast data connection everywhere, why isn't this included already?
there's an app called Air-Sharing that works perfectly. I agree with the Podcasts.
Are we sure this survey is not bogus? It seems strange to me that it clearly states that " the following items are not available in the iPhone 3g" and then lists search in contacts which is clearly available. Add to that "teh iPhone" and it's starting to get a little suspiciously unprofessional to me.
Just sayin'.
Oh, it's fake... just waiting to see how long the others take to catch on.
I understand that Apple has put "Cut and Paste" on a list, but I would like to know how in the hell Google Street View has a higher priority than "cut and paste" or turn by turn directions or even MMS?
I understand that Apple has put "Cut and Paste" on a list, but I would like to know how in the hell Google Street View has a higher priority than "cut and paste" or turn by turn directions or even MMS?
Just add every possible addition or upgrade! We could use the entire list. The only one I don't care about is the option of switching carriers. I don't mind AT&T hopefully they keep adding more 3g towers and hopefully they keep improving 3g top speeds. But please just add every feature that is possible to add.
I would say preferably from Verizon's far better coverage network, but CDMA makes that one DOA, alas.
Never say Never Again, remember how that James Bond film came about, since Blackberry has a phone that will do both GSM and CDMA. When the AT&T Apple deal is over I expect you will see a CDMA iPhone and hopefully one that also does GSM.
My experience with the iPhone 3G was a love/hate affair. I could see that it would be an interesting and potentially useful device if it worked well and was properly implemented.
Having recently returned an iPhone 3G, I can say that it functioned poorly. Steve should be publicly pilloried for releasing such a poor device. It is obvious to me that nobody at Apple actually tested the damn thing the way ordinary users are likely to utilize the device. There were too many problems to describe here, but here are a few.
The "GPS" was a horrid joke. The lack of voice dialing make it much less useful than a plain old Moto that is several years old. Safari crashed a great deal, even using the restart/flush cache/limit number of pages procedures. The lack of Flash support meant that many web sites were completely unusable. Quicktime support was inadequate. Even Apple's home page did not function properly because of this...hello!!!
Even though I knew beforehand that the battery life would be poor, it was much worse than expected. I was always looking for some place to plug it in.
Although this part is not specifically Apple's responsibility, many of the apps were "rough". I suspect that this was, at least in part, a consequence of the unwarranted secrecy and NDA problems. One example, UrbanSpoons interesting application would pick items which were a 30 to 45 minute drive away instead of simply showing you what is nearby. Duh!
I was not willing to pay the amount required to be what amounted to an alpha tester of a device that is obviously not going to be fixed. It is too bad that there is not an open source project that is not tied to any particular cell provider.
The best comment I have read about the iPhone 3G was one that described it as "flawed at its core".
My experience with the iPhone 3G was a love/hate affair. I could see that it would be an interesting and potentially useful device if it worked well and was properly implemented.
Having recently returned an iPhone 3G, I can say that it functioned poorly. Steve should be publicly pilloried for releasing such a poor device. It is obvious to me that nobody at Apple actually tested the damn thing the way ordinary users are likely to utilize the device. There were too many problems to describe here, but here are a few.
The "GPS" was a horrid joke. The lack of voice dialing make it much less useful than a plain old Moto that is several years old. Safari crashed a great deal, even using the restart/flush cache/limit number of pages procedures. The lack of Flash support meant that many web sites were completely unusable. Quicktime support was inadequate. Even Apple's home page did not function properly because of this...hello!!!
Even though I knew beforehand that the battery life would be poor, it was much worse than expected. I was always looking for some place to plug it in.
Although this part is not specifically Apple's responsibility, many of the apps were "rough". I suspect that this was, at least in part, a consequence of the unwarranted secrecy and NDA problems. One example, UrbanSpoons interesting application would pick items which were a 30 to 45 minute drive away instead of simply showing you what is nearby. Duh!
I was not willing to pay the amount required to be what amounted to an alpha tester of a device that is obviously not going to be fixed. It is too bad that there is not an open source project that is not tied to any particular cell provider.
The best comment I have read about the iPhone 3G was one that described it as "flawed at its core".
I'll vouch for the frequent Safari crashes on an iPod touch. Nothing fancy, just plain Jane web pages.
Even though I knew beforehand that the battery life would be poor, it was much worse than expected. I was always looking for some place to plug it in.
I would have believed your posting as I have some of the software issues you say you experienced, but to say that you knew that the battery life was horrible and then have it to be worse than expected brings doubts that you had an iPhone 3G that wasn't defective, hacked to allow background processes, or at all.
PS: I have to plug in my iPhone often, too, but that is because I use the crap out of it.
I would have believed your posting as I have some of the software issues you say you experienced, but to say that you knew that the battery life was horrible and then have it to be worse than expected brings doubts that you had an iPhone 3G that wasn't defective, hacked to allow background processes, or at all.
PS: I have to plug in my iPhone often, too, but that is because I use the crap out of it.
I made several trips to the genius bar and had it checked out. The only comment was that they confirmed all the Safari crashes. No, it was not jailbroken or unlocked.
P.S. I discussed the possibility of backround/runaway processes with the Apple reps. They said that it uses application switching and that was not an issue and was not showing any such thing when they ran the hardware tests.
The long and short of my comment about battery life was and is that I did not expect much and it was worse than expected. You can also expect the battery to need replacing sooner than expected as the useful service life typically consists of a finite number of charging cycles, but I am guessing that you have purchased AppleCare for it and so this should be covered.
I hope that you have a better experience with yours than I had with the one I had.
"Please Fix the iPhone is a technological ode to our favorite phone. A modern love poem. Sure, nothing is perfect, but this site brings together little musings and lustful tech haiku about the finest phone and how to make it even better. So take your favorite iPhone mantra and add it to the many wishes on the site in the hope that Apple will take notice."
I would like sms/text forwarding the most and send/receive contacts with others by "air"
Never say Never Again, remember how that James Bond film came about, since Blackberry has a phone that will do both GSM and CDMA. When the AT&T Apple deal is over I expect you will see a CDMA iPhone and hopefully one that also does GSM.
Not likely. There will certainly be a Verizon iphone in a year or two when the exclusivity agreement with AT&T ends, but I'm not convinced it will be a CDMA version yet. It will depend on exactly when the agreement ends. If in the next year, yes. If in two years, no.
Verizon has already announced that it is working on moving to LTE for it's 4G network, just like AT&T and most of the rest of the world. Only Sprint is staying on the Qualcomm bandwagon of CDMA->EVDO->WiMax.
Assuming Apple's exclusivity with AT&T runs through the end of 2009 (most assume it goes to July 2010) we will be getting very close to Verizon flipping the switch on 4G at that time.
So I cannot see Apple investing money in developing a CDMA iphone when they already know Verizon will be moving towards the same technology that AT&T, Europe, and Asia use. It just makes more sense for them to come out with a updated LTE version of the iphone that they can sell everywhere for years to come. A CDMA version in 2010 would have a short life cycle on Verizon. So why invest the money in making a second version that will be obsolete within a year after it comes out? Why not just manufacture one version of the device that works everywhere in the world?
I could see Apple adding a 1700 band so that it will work on Tmobile USA's 3G/4G network (ie, quad band GSM and quad band HSPA/LTE so it works everywhere in the world) but I think CDMA handset manufacturing will shrink over the next two years. Every CDMA handset manuafcturer has to look at when Verizon will start turning on LTE and decide when they start cutting back on CDMA development, and putting more resources into LTE.
Even the CDMA carriers in Canada have announced they are moving to the GSM->HSPA->LTE roadmap. So the market for CDMA is going to be limited to Sprint only in the US, especially since Alltel is being snatched up by Verizon. The only other CDMA carriers left after that will be some Korean carriers, and old Verizon subscribers that do not upgrade to LTE devices. That's just not a big enough market for Apple to justify manufacturing a second version of their handset.
Even if Verizon decided to keep CDMA active for years and run it side by side with their LTE network, there would be no reason for Apple to make a CDMA version. The 4G iphone on LTE would run on Verizon just fine.
If the exclusivity agreement ended today, yes Apple would get a CDMA version out ASAP. They'd have two years of selling to Verizon and Sprint customers in the US, and a few in Canada and Korea too. They'd easily make money for the next two years despite having to manufacture a separate CDMA version for them. But in 18 months the marketplace will be a lot different, and LTE will be the direction everyone is moving to.
So yes, you will eventually get your Verizon iphone, but it might not be a CDMA/EVDO version. Timing will be everything.
A most informative post, but I do believe there's one however....
.....we know from experience how long it takes to roll out a major new infrastructure across an entire cell network (and Verizon's is the largest here) -- AT&T may have announced its 4G plans, e.g., but is still struggling to get 3G working outside of major metro areas, where the iPhone steps down to the AT&T legacy network.
so if Apple had an LTE phone (a new tech to me, if anyone wants to elaborate further, thank you!) on the initial Verizon LTE/4G network, as soon as you crossed the Hudson River from Manhattan, e.g., it would have no lower speed legacy net to revert to, and hence, no signal, no net, no phone. and..... ......
ergo, without supporting something else, e.g., EVDO, we still won't see an iPhone on Verizon for at least a year or three longer than you've projected.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdeetz
Not likely. There will certainly be a Verizon iphone in a year or two when the exclusivity agreement with AT&T ends, but I'm not convinced it will be a CDMA version yet. It will depend on exactly when the agreement ends. If in the next year, yes. If in two years, no.
Verizon has already announced that it is working on moving to LTE for it's 4G network, just like AT&T and most of the rest of the world. Only Sprint is staying on the Qualcomm bandwagon of CDMA->EVDO->WiMax.
Assuming Apple's exclusivity with AT&T runs through the end of 2009 (most assume it goes to July 2010) we will be getting very close to Verizon flipping the switch on 4G at that time.
So I cannot see Apple investing money in developing a CDMA iphone when they already know Verizon will be moving towards the same technology that AT&T, Europe, and Asia use. It just makes more sense for them to come out with a updated LTE version of the iphone that they can sell everywhere for years to come. A CDMA version in 2010 would have a short life cycle on Verizon. So why invest the money in making a second version that will be obsolete within a year after it comes out? Why not just manufacture one version of the device that works everywhere in the world?
I could see Apple adding a 1700 band so that it will work on Tmobile USA's 3G/4G network (ie, quad band GSM and quad band HSPA/LTE so it works everywhere in the world) but I think CDMA handset manufacturing will shrink over the next two years. Every CDMA handset manuafcturer has to look at when Verizon will start turning on LTE and decide when they start cutting back on CDMA development, and putting more resources into LTE.
Comments
Video recording would be nice. Tethering is definitely one I'd like to see too. I'd also love to see mass storage mode implemented on the iPhone/iPod touch - not for music transfer, just so I can carry files around easily.
My top feature request though is the ability to download podcasts directly to the iPhone. I've got a fast data connection everywhere, why isn't this included already?
there's an app called Air-Sharing that works perfectly. I agree with the Podcasts.
Are we sure this survey is not bogus? It seems strange to me that it clearly states that " the following items are not available in the iPhone 3g" and then lists search in contacts which is clearly available. Add to that "teh iPhone" and it's starting to get a little suspiciously unprofessional to me.
Just sayin'.
Oh, it's fake... just waiting to see how long the others take to catch on.
How?
I understand that Apple has put "Cut and Paste" on a list, but I would like to know how in the hell Google Street View has a higher priority than "cut and paste" or turn by turn directions or even MMS?
How?
God only knows, cause if Steve knows he's wrong.
AT&T has recently begun surveying some of its longer-term iPhone buyers asking what features they would most like to see added to the Apple handset.
Here's some feedback:
The feature I'd most like to see added to "the Apple handset" is that I could get it from carriers other than AT&T!
I would say preferably from Verizon's far better coverage network, but CDMA makes that one DOA, alas.
http://www.petitiononline.com/IPMMS/petition.html
I would say preferably from Verizon's far better coverage network, but CDMA makes that one DOA, alas.
Never say Never Again, remember how that James Bond film came about, since Blackberry has a phone that will do both GSM and CDMA. When the AT&T Apple deal is over I expect you will see a CDMA iPhone and hopefully one that also does GSM.
Lower minimum monthly charge would be next. I don't ever come close to their minimum for phone calls. I mainly use it for apps and safari.
Affordable worldwide roaming with unlimited data would be next.
I could care less about text messaging, mms, user changeable batteries, or most of the other items on their list.
Copy and paste would be nice but I frankly don't see how that could work very readily with the present user interface.
Having recently returned an iPhone 3G, I can say that it functioned poorly. Steve should be publicly pilloried for releasing such a poor device. It is obvious to me that nobody at Apple actually tested the damn thing the way ordinary users are likely to utilize the device. There were too many problems to describe here, but here are a few.
The "GPS" was a horrid joke. The lack of voice dialing make it much less useful than a plain old Moto that is several years old. Safari crashed a great deal, even using the restart/flush cache/limit number of pages procedures. The lack of Flash support meant that many web sites were completely unusable. Quicktime support was inadequate. Even Apple's home page did not function properly because of this...hello!!!
Even though I knew beforehand that the battery life would be poor, it was much worse than expected. I was always looking for some place to plug it in.
Although this part is not specifically Apple's responsibility, many of the apps were "rough". I suspect that this was, at least in part, a consequence of the unwarranted secrecy and NDA problems. One example, UrbanSpoons interesting application would pick items which were a 30 to 45 minute drive away instead of simply showing you what is nearby. Duh!
I was not willing to pay the amount required to be what amounted to an alpha tester of a device that is obviously not going to be fixed. It is too bad that there is not an open source project that is not tied to any particular cell provider.
The best comment I have read about the iPhone 3G was one that described it as "flawed at its core".
God only knows, cause if Steve knows he's wrong.
I'll second that opinion. Steve must never really use his iPhone to compose messages longer than one sentence.
My experience with the iPhone 3G was a love/hate affair. I could see that it would be an interesting and potentially useful device if it worked well and was properly implemented.
Having recently returned an iPhone 3G, I can say that it functioned poorly. Steve should be publicly pilloried for releasing such a poor device. It is obvious to me that nobody at Apple actually tested the damn thing the way ordinary users are likely to utilize the device. There were too many problems to describe here, but here are a few.
The "GPS" was a horrid joke. The lack of voice dialing make it much less useful than a plain old Moto that is several years old. Safari crashed a great deal, even using the restart/flush cache/limit number of pages procedures. The lack of Flash support meant that many web sites were completely unusable. Quicktime support was inadequate. Even Apple's home page did not function properly because of this...hello!!!
Even though I knew beforehand that the battery life would be poor, it was much worse than expected. I was always looking for some place to plug it in.
Although this part is not specifically Apple's responsibility, many of the apps were "rough". I suspect that this was, at least in part, a consequence of the unwarranted secrecy and NDA problems. One example, UrbanSpoons interesting application would pick items which were a 30 to 45 minute drive away instead of simply showing you what is nearby. Duh!
I was not willing to pay the amount required to be what amounted to an alpha tester of a device that is obviously not going to be fixed. It is too bad that there is not an open source project that is not tied to any particular cell provider.
The best comment I have read about the iPhone 3G was one that described it as "flawed at its core".
I'll vouch for the frequent Safari crashes on an iPod touch. Nothing fancy, just plain Jane web pages.
Even though I knew beforehand that the battery life would be poor, it was much worse than expected. I was always looking for some place to plug it in.
I would have believed your posting as I have some of the software issues you say you experienced, but to say that you knew that the battery life was horrible and then have it to be worse than expected brings doubts that you had an iPhone 3G that wasn't defective, hacked to allow background processes, or at all.
PS: I have to plug in my iPhone often, too, but that is because I use the crap out of it.
I would have believed your posting as I have some of the software issues you say you experienced, but to say that you knew that the battery life was horrible and then have it to be worse than expected brings doubts that you had an iPhone 3G that wasn't defective, hacked to allow background processes, or at all.
PS: I have to plug in my iPhone often, too, but that is because I use the crap out of it.
I made several trips to the genius bar and had it checked out. The only comment was that they confirmed all the Safari crashes. No, it was not jailbroken or unlocked.
P.S. I discussed the possibility of backround/runaway processes with the Apple reps. They said that it uses application switching and that was not an issue and was not showing any such thing when they ran the hardware tests.
The long and short of my comment about battery life was and is that I did not expect much and it was worse than expected. You can also expect the battery to need replacing sooner than expected as the useful service life typically consists of a finite number of charging cycles, but I am guessing that you have purchased AppleCare for it and so this should be covered.
I hope that you have a better experience with yours than I had with the one I had.
Cheers
http://pleasefixtheiphone.com/
"Please Fix the iPhone is a technological ode to our favorite phone. A modern love poem. Sure, nothing is perfect, but this site brings together little musings and lustful tech haiku about the finest phone and how to make it even better. So take your favorite iPhone mantra and add it to the many wishes on the site in the hope that Apple will take notice."
I would like sms/text forwarding the most and send/receive contacts with others by "air"
...and send/receive contacts with others by "air"
At the very least, we should be able to send and receive vCards with Mail.
Never say Never Again, remember how that James Bond film came about, since Blackberry has a phone that will do both GSM and CDMA. When the AT&T Apple deal is over I expect you will see a CDMA iPhone and hopefully one that also does GSM.
Not likely. There will certainly be a Verizon iphone in a year or two when the exclusivity agreement with AT&T ends, but I'm not convinced it will be a CDMA version yet. It will depend on exactly when the agreement ends. If in the next year, yes. If in two years, no.
Verizon has already announced that it is working on moving to LTE for it's 4G network, just like AT&T and most of the rest of the world. Only Sprint is staying on the Qualcomm bandwagon of CDMA->EVDO->WiMax.
Assuming Apple's exclusivity with AT&T runs through the end of 2009 (most assume it goes to July 2010) we will be getting very close to Verizon flipping the switch on 4G at that time.
So I cannot see Apple investing money in developing a CDMA iphone when they already know Verizon will be moving towards the same technology that AT&T, Europe, and Asia use. It just makes more sense for them to come out with a updated LTE version of the iphone that they can sell everywhere for years to come. A CDMA version in 2010 would have a short life cycle on Verizon. So why invest the money in making a second version that will be obsolete within a year after it comes out? Why not just manufacture one version of the device that works everywhere in the world?
I could see Apple adding a 1700 band so that it will work on Tmobile USA's 3G/4G network (ie, quad band GSM and quad band HSPA/LTE so it works everywhere in the world) but I think CDMA handset manufacturing will shrink over the next two years. Every CDMA handset manuafcturer has to look at when Verizon will start turning on LTE and decide when they start cutting back on CDMA development, and putting more resources into LTE.
Even the CDMA carriers in Canada have announced they are moving to the GSM->HSPA->LTE roadmap. So the market for CDMA is going to be limited to Sprint only in the US, especially since Alltel is being snatched up by Verizon. The only other CDMA carriers left after that will be some Korean carriers, and old Verizon subscribers that do not upgrade to LTE devices. That's just not a big enough market for Apple to justify manufacturing a second version of their handset.
Even if Verizon decided to keep CDMA active for years and run it side by side with their LTE network, there would be no reason for Apple to make a CDMA version. The 4G iphone on LTE would run on Verizon just fine.
If the exclusivity agreement ended today, yes Apple would get a CDMA version out ASAP. They'd have two years of selling to Verizon and Sprint customers in the US, and a few in Canada and Korea too. They'd easily make money for the next two years despite having to manufacture a separate CDMA version for them. But in 18 months the marketplace will be a lot different, and LTE will be the direction everyone is moving to.
So yes, you will eventually get your Verizon iphone, but it might not be a CDMA/EVDO version. Timing will be everything.
1. Larger screen. There's like an 1/8 inch of bezel on each side now. Use it all up! 3.7" screen is better than 3.5" screen.
2. More pixels. 720x480. Will make web browsing faster as smaller text becomes more legible
3. More RAM & storage. At least 256 MB RAM and 32 GB storage
4. Flash movie plugin
5. More video content on ITMS or video content on the iPhone
For AT&T:
1. Cheaper data plan!
2. Cheaper voice plan!
3. Expand the 3G network to match the EDGE network
4. Stop capping 3G data rates
5. SMS should be part of the data plan
.....we know from experience how long it takes to roll out a major new infrastructure across an entire cell network (and Verizon's is the largest here) -- AT&T may have announced its 4G plans, e.g., but is still struggling to get 3G working outside of major metro areas, where the iPhone steps down to the AT&T legacy network.
so if Apple had an LTE phone (a new tech to me, if anyone wants to elaborate further, thank you!) on the initial Verizon LTE/4G network, as soon as you crossed the Hudson River from Manhattan, e.g., it would have no lower speed legacy net to revert to, and hence, no signal, no net, no phone. and..... ......
ergo, without supporting something else, e.g., EVDO, we still won't see an iPhone on Verizon for at least a year or three longer than you've projected.
Not likely. There will certainly be a Verizon iphone in a year or two when the exclusivity agreement with AT&T ends, but I'm not convinced it will be a CDMA version yet. It will depend on exactly when the agreement ends. If in the next year, yes. If in two years, no.
Verizon has already announced that it is working on moving to LTE for it's 4G network, just like AT&T and most of the rest of the world. Only Sprint is staying on the Qualcomm bandwagon of CDMA->EVDO->WiMax.
Assuming Apple's exclusivity with AT&T runs through the end of 2009 (most assume it goes to July 2010) we will be getting very close to Verizon flipping the switch on 4G at that time.
So I cannot see Apple investing money in developing a CDMA iphone when they already know Verizon will be moving towards the same technology that AT&T, Europe, and Asia use. It just makes more sense for them to come out with a updated LTE version of the iphone that they can sell everywhere for years to come. A CDMA version in 2010 would have a short life cycle on Verizon. So why invest the money in making a second version that will be obsolete within a year after it comes out? Why not just manufacture one version of the device that works everywhere in the world?
I could see Apple adding a 1700 band so that it will work on Tmobile USA's 3G/4G network (ie, quad band GSM and quad band HSPA/LTE so it works everywhere in the world) but I think CDMA handset manufacturing will shrink over the next two years. Every CDMA handset manuafcturer has to look at when Verizon will start turning on LTE and decide when they start cutting back on CDMA development, and putting more resources into LTE.
Flash
Cut and Paste