Not that I think the next iPad is coming that soon, but the fact that Black Friday is in 5 days would only serve to make it more likely, not less. Apple could get rid of all stock of existing iPads by pricing them right, and then move on to the next version. Not gonna happen, but your logic is off.
Do you have any precedent that shows Apple releasing any major new HW after Thanksgiving? I can’t think of any. I can’t think of any company that routinely dropped major new products right after Black Friday. Given the time stores give for returns they’d have to work it to mid December. Because seeking to screw customers over, it’s just not a good time to market a new product in pretty every case I can imagine. I’m sure there some bona fide business reasons why this isn’t commonplace.
Do you have any precedent that shows Apple releasing any major new HW after Thanksgiving? I can?t think of any. I can?t think of any company that routinely dropped major new products right after Black Friday. Given the time stores give for returns they?d have to work it to mid December. Because seeking to screw customers over, it?s just not a good time to market a new product in pretty every case I can imagine. I?m sure there some bona fide business reasons why this isn?t commonplace.
The specific holiday? No, but that's not the point. Apple releases new hardware all the time after goosing the market one way or another to clear out old stock. Sound like any particular holiday to you?
That's why they give away free iPods with the purchase of a Mac in the run-up to back to school and then release a new model right after.
The last time Steve Jobs was sent packing, he left, all right, and formed NeXt. The second coming of Steve Jobs upended computers and every thing digital.
This insanity is no longer funny. It borders on psychotic. Rumors of rumored possibilities beget rumors of reactions to rumors of rumors. Certain rumors are then rumored to be fact which causes "analysts" to react to the rumored factual rumors.
Then, when reality sticks it's ugly head into the equation, reality itself becomes a rumor to be dismissed as a rumor only to be resurrected as a prediction come true.
To the posters here who are discussing this as if it were fact...are you really that damn stupid?
In an ideal world connecting to a cellular net wouldn't be more complicated than connecting to a WiFi network, enter a few parameters, and off you go; the device gets authorized as having paid for service by its unique ID. Done.
Unfortunately the reality is different: SIMs can be remotely programmer by carriers (and indirectly by governments) to do all sorts of things consumers have no clue about, like e.g. enabling audio transmissions without any signs of an active phone call, locate people through the network towers, etc.
The ability to go off grid is key to maintain basic civil liberties, and that means a removable SIM, and surely Apple will not make the SIM removable, then the entire reasoning is about more miniaturization.
Further, in an ideal world, everyone would pay the same for the same service. But again, that's not the case. e.g. using an original iPhone plan with an unlocked iPhone4 from overseas was already causing AT&T to adjust my calling plan because they detected an iPhone4, even though not bought through them and not subsidized by them, and even though my original calling plan was not tied to a specific device. I had to threaten with legal action to get my original, cheaper calling plan back. And why are there different prices for the same services depending on the user uses a Blackberry, iPhone, etc?
By having a built-in SIM that needs to go through the AppStore or some other channels, both Apple and the carriers get an extra level of control over what they will or will not sell to you based on the device you own.
e.g. when roaming in Austria I use a SIM and plan designed for the iPad in my iPhone, because it fits my needs better than what I can get for the phone. This only works when the SIM is decoupled hardware which only the user controls into which device he sticks it.
Further, with iOS devices not giving the legitimate users root privileges, there's even less control over what's going on on a computing device that you entrust sensitive information to. It's sad that we have to pray for exploitable security holes in a device to allow for jail breaking an a modicum of control over privacy issues.
Between jail breaking and unlocking users retain some control over their digital life. A built-in SIM will make such things even more difficult.
A side note: the people wondering why carriers want locked phones even though there's a legal contract to stick with the carrier for a fixed period of time, the answer is two words: roaming fees!
To use a phone locked to AT&T in Europe is $1.99/minute, a cheap European pre-paid SIM allows the same call for a few cents. Many iPhone users are frequent business travelers, and the inability to swap SIM cards earns carriers many millions in extra fees each year.
Moral of the story: things that would be great in a world ruled by engineers are horrible choices in a world ruled by business people, politicians and lawyers.
The thing that made the GSM phones such a success is that due to the removable SIM cards the kind of tie down to carriers people had in the old days of mobile phones went away, this increased competition, etc.
To give up that control by handing over the ability to choose what SIM can be in a device would be bad news for consumers.
So Apple is granted a patent application for something that may or may not be an actual product... Some stupid blog runs with a RUMOR story that it may be an actual product. The EU carriers are allegedly having a fit over this "product"... And now this article is stating that Apple is backing down from producing this fictional "product" because of those carriers!?!?
Good lord, what is journalism coming to? Apple NEVER said they were even attempting to make a programmable SIM, they just filed for a patent on it! Damn, these internets and the gullible morons who believe anything they read can really create a mountain out of molehill.
An integrated SIM doesn?t mean there is no SIM, it just means there is no physical SIM that is moved around. This mental block on how a SIM has to work is silly. All it has on it is some very basic data. Basic data that that can be added to a 3GPP device via many avenues. For example, the future of SIMs could be using NFC or BT to securely handshake and transfer the data at carrier?s store or through a kiosk. Another is buying the code in a vending machine and inputting it the way your would a unique serial key for software.
Again, the integrated SIM isn?t removing the SIM, just integrating, and it?s not going to make unlocked devices locked. It?s just removing the superfluous physical plastic for data that can be more easily and conveniently moved in other ways in this 21.1 century C.E. A truly world traveler could potentially have dozens of of SIMs for various countries and carriers in his phone at all times and only needs to access the Settings to switch between them as he crosses borders.
This is an engineer speaking, but once the SIM is not physically inserted and removed, it's under software control what's in there. There is no force-eject that's reliable, there is no using of a plan that wasn't intended for the specific device you're using because the software will first verify the device type and refuse to program your embedded SIM if it's not to the carrier's and/or Apple's liking.
It will be also quite difficult to pull the SIM out of your dead phone and insert it into a friend's or stranger's phone to make a quick call until you have a chance to recharge or fix your own phone.
If Apple wants to make it easier for travelers, make bigger phones that accept multiple SIM and can be active on more than one net concurrently.
I just don't buy this. Apple has the power here- if the carriers want to stop paying the subsidies they are contracted to pay, then they are breaking a contract term that would be significant and material. There would be damages. I simply think Apple would say, "OK- so no subsidies- we'll see how long the market allows this. One of you idiots will break. And we will still sell the phones."
Losing the sim is a matter of internal space. If the carriers have a problem with it, tough crap. They can actually provide better value for their customers to keep their "relationships."
As for me, my relationship is with my iPhone. And I can't wait to dump ATT when Verizon gets it...
2) Please don?t use this forum to promote your blog site.
You misunderstand the concept of SIM. Apple and GSMA are not colluding to removing the SIM from devices, they are working on removing the need for a physical SIM card that takes up a great deal of space for its data size and functionality, and is a potential weak point for engineering. All this does is make it integrated, not disappear. Instead of having multiple SIM cards you have swap in and out, you?d just use BT, NFC, or manual input to put in the 20 digit code that you can then switch easily via your settings.
So what stops someone from just guessing someone else's 20 digit number and using it?
Only person who has issues with SIMs is Apple, since their main obsession with anything they make is how thin it is rather than how well it works.
edit: Thanks pmz. I didn’t even notice their trollish hyperbole. Anyone who claims that Apple doesn’t focus on their product usability is surely just trolling.
No user replaceable battery. Other phones have no issues whatsoever having a door on the back to allow replacing the battery and sim card.
For Steve having a seem on the back of the phone tarnishes "perfection". For everyone else it means having to return to the apple store for a battery.
Edit: Eliminating the SIM altogether allows them to finally remove that last pesky "hole" in the phone. How can't you see this design theme, since every Mac book also has no observable cooling vents?
Lame. I took my phone, stuck in the SIM card and that was all it took to "activate" it. Installing itunes to do the same thing is absurd.
Oh, and the latest iphone 4 commercial "claims" it is the thinnest phone (it isn't). Saying they don't care about it is simply untrue.
Or isn't that the whole point of the mac book air commercial?
edit: Thanks pmz. I didn?t even notice their trollish hyperbole. Anyone who claims that Apple doesn?t focus on their product usability is surely just trolling.
Of course they do. That's why they gave away free bumpers for their retarded antenna design.
This is an engineer speaking, but once the SIM is not physically inserted and removed, it's under software control what's in there. There is no force-eject that's reliable, there is no using of a plan that wasn't intended for the specific device you're using because the software will first verify the device type and refuse to program your embedded SIM if it's not to the carrier's and/or Apple's liking.
This is already the case. A locked phone is a locked phone.
Quote:
It will be also quite difficult to pull the SIM out of your dead phone and insert it into a friend's or stranger's phone to make a quick call until you have a chance to recharge or fix your own phone.
This is the only point where the user could lose out. If the phone itself dies (but they still have access to it) and the user didn?t back up their data or have access to that backup then the couldn?t simply pop the SIM out and put into a new device, but I bet that particular scenario is even less common than those that cried for a removable battery in their Mac notebook despite never before buying an extra battery.
Quote:
If Apple wants to make it easier for travelers, make bigger phones that accept multiple SIM and can be active on more than one net concurrently.
You want something akin to multi-CD changer in your cellphone. That?s just silly.
I just don't buy this. Apple has the power here- if the carriers want to stop paying the subsidies they are contracted to pay, then they are breaking a contract term that would be significant and material. There would be damages.
What do you want to bet the contracts aren't strictly limited to existing models or traditional carrier practices (such as the use of SIM cards).
Better watch out for those black UN helicopters -- I think the voices inside your head must be telling you they're coming for you (not to suggest actual insanity -- it's probably just the shrill droning of some Australian media magnate's shills :-)
is living how other people tell you to. Sorry, but being angry about an important topic doesn't make you crazy. Current policies may fit whatever agenda you personally have, but by and large they are a detriment to the American citizens. Or, maybe you're just apathetic.
It's not as if there aren't plenty of reputable news organizations writing about the TSA. And if you would allow your wife or child to be publicly groped or scanned you are a coward.
Truthfully, I don't have much to say much about politics in general, but these developments need to be broadcast everywhere, all of the time until people at least put some thought into the notion of putting pressure on their governments to let them know what they will and won't tolerate.
What do you want to bet the contracts aren't strictly limited to existing models or traditional carrier practices (such as the use of SIM cards).
So you mean that the contracts actually specify that the phone must use a carrier provided sim card?
I hadn't thought about that. I was more focusing on the fact that the contracts would specify the subsidies, and include multiple phone models year over year. But yeah- the idea that Apple maybe altering a material part of the contract if they stop using sims... interesting...
The carrier's can achieve exactly what they are trying to achieve with a paper contract that guarantees them x amount of dollars in monthly instalments.
All a virtual sim might achieve is stop asshole carriers from hindering your ability to access an additional carrier should you travel overseas.
Who cares if it isn't subsidised anyway? It's the total cost of ownership that matters. Is anyone dumb enough to go out and buy a "free" phone without considering how the wholesale price is built into the ongoing monthly fee.
So you mean that the contracts actually specify that the phone must use a carrier provided sim card?
I hadn't thought about that. I was more focusing on the fact that the contracts would specify the subsidies, and include multiple phone models year over year. But yeah- the idea that Apple maybe altering a material part of the contract if they stop using sims... interesting...
Hadn't thought about that.
Wouldn't it also have an effect on deployment? ie Retraining employees, changing certain systems, etc. without any material benefit to the carrier...
Comments
Not that I think the next iPad is coming that soon, but the fact that Black Friday is in 5 days would only serve to make it more likely, not less. Apple could get rid of all stock of existing iPads by pricing them right, and then move on to the next version. Not gonna happen, but your logic is off.
Do you have any precedent that shows Apple releasing any major new HW after Thanksgiving? I can’t think of any. I can’t think of any company that routinely dropped major new products right after Black Friday. Given the time stores give for returns they’d have to work it to mid December. Because seeking to screw customers over, it’s just not a good time to market a new product in pretty every case I can imagine. I’m sure there some bona fide business reasons why this isn’t commonplace.
Do you have any precedent that shows Apple releasing any major new HW after Thanksgiving? I can?t think of any. I can?t think of any company that routinely dropped major new products right after Black Friday. Given the time stores give for returns they?d have to work it to mid December. Because seeking to screw customers over, it?s just not a good time to market a new product in pretty every case I can imagine. I?m sure there some bona fide business reasons why this isn?t commonplace.
The specific holiday? No, but that's not the point. Apple releases new hardware all the time after goosing the market one way or another to clear out old stock. Sound like any particular holiday to you?
That's why they give away free iPods with the purchase of a Mac in the run-up to back to school and then release a new model right after.
Carriers,
YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!!!
Then, when reality sticks it's ugly head into the equation, reality itself becomes a rumor to be dismissed as a rumor only to be resurrected as a prediction come true.
To the posters here who are discussing this as if it were fact...are you really that damn stupid?
Unfortunately the reality is different: SIMs can be remotely programmer by carriers (and indirectly by governments) to do all sorts of things consumers have no clue about, like e.g. enabling audio transmissions without any signs of an active phone call, locate people through the network towers, etc.
The ability to go off grid is key to maintain basic civil liberties, and that means a removable SIM, and surely Apple will not make the SIM removable, then the entire reasoning is about more miniaturization.
Further, in an ideal world, everyone would pay the same for the same service. But again, that's not the case. e.g. using an original iPhone plan with an unlocked iPhone4 from overseas was already causing AT&T to adjust my calling plan because they detected an iPhone4, even though not bought through them and not subsidized by them, and even though my original calling plan was not tied to a specific device. I had to threaten with legal action to get my original, cheaper calling plan back. And why are there different prices for the same services depending on the user uses a Blackberry, iPhone, etc?
By having a built-in SIM that needs to go through the AppStore or some other channels, both Apple and the carriers get an extra level of control over what they will or will not sell to you based on the device you own.
e.g. when roaming in Austria I use a SIM and plan designed for the iPad in my iPhone, because it fits my needs better than what I can get for the phone. This only works when the SIM is decoupled hardware which only the user controls into which device he sticks it.
Further, with iOS devices not giving the legitimate users root privileges, there's even less control over what's going on on a computing device that you entrust sensitive information to. It's sad that we have to pray for exploitable security holes in a device to allow for jail breaking an a modicum of control over privacy issues.
Between jail breaking and unlocking users retain some control over their digital life. A built-in SIM will make such things even more difficult.
A side note: the people wondering why carriers want locked phones even though there's a legal contract to stick with the carrier for a fixed period of time, the answer is two words: roaming fees!
To use a phone locked to AT&T in Europe is $1.99/minute, a cheap European pre-paid SIM allows the same call for a few cents. Many iPhone users are frequent business travelers, and the inability to swap SIM cards earns carriers many millions in extra fees each year.
Moral of the story: things that would be great in a world ruled by engineers are horrible choices in a world ruled by business people, politicians and lawyers.
The thing that made the GSM phones such a success is that due to the removable SIM cards the kind of tie down to carriers people had in the old days of mobile phones went away, this increased competition, etc.
To give up that control by handing over the ability to choose what SIM can be in a device would be bad news for consumers.
Good lord, what is journalism coming to? Apple NEVER said they were even attempting to make a programmable SIM, they just filed for a patent on it! Damn, these internets and the gullible morons who believe anything they read can really create a mountain out of molehill.
An integrated SIM doesn?t mean there is no SIM, it just means there is no physical SIM that is moved around. This mental block on how a SIM has to work is silly. All it has on it is some very basic data. Basic data that that can be added to a 3GPP device via many avenues. For example, the future of SIMs could be using NFC or BT to securely handshake and transfer the data at carrier?s store or through a kiosk. Another is buying the code in a vending machine and inputting it the way your would a unique serial key for software.
Again, the integrated SIM isn?t removing the SIM, just integrating, and it?s not going to make unlocked devices locked. It?s just removing the superfluous physical plastic for data that can be more easily and conveniently moved in other ways in this 21.1 century C.E. A truly world traveler could potentially have dozens of of SIMs for various countries and carriers in his phone at all times and only needs to access the Settings to switch between them as he crosses borders.
This is an engineer speaking, but once the SIM is not physically inserted and removed, it's under software control what's in there. There is no force-eject that's reliable, there is no using of a plan that wasn't intended for the specific device you're using because the software will first verify the device type and refuse to program your embedded SIM if it's not to the carrier's and/or Apple's liking.
It will be also quite difficult to pull the SIM out of your dead phone and insert it into a friend's or stranger's phone to make a quick call until you have a chance to recharge or fix your own phone.
If Apple wants to make it easier for travelers, make bigger phones that accept multiple SIM and can be active on more than one net concurrently.
Losing the sim is a matter of internal space. If the carriers have a problem with it, tough crap. They can actually provide better value for their customers to keep their "relationships."
As for me, my relationship is with my iPhone. And I can't wait to dump ATT when Verizon gets it...
Mark my words, it will happen and the cellphone market will be better for it.
1) They have thought of it, just as GSMA as also thought of it. 2) Please don?t use this forum to promote your blog site.
You misunderstand the concept of SIM. Apple and GSMA are not colluding to removing the SIM from devices, they are working on removing the need for a physical SIM card that takes up a great deal of space for its data size and functionality, and is a potential weak point for engineering. All this does is make it integrated, not disappear. Instead of having multiple SIM cards you have swap in and out, you?d just use BT, NFC, or manual input to put in the 20 digit code that you can then switch easily via your settings.
So what stops someone from just guessing someone else's 20 digit number and using it?
Only person who has issues with SIMs is Apple, since their main obsession with anything they make is how thin it is rather than how well it works.
So what stops someone from just guessing someone else's 20 digit number and using it?
Only person who has issues with SIMs is Apple, since their main obsession with anything they make is how thin it is rather than how well it works.
Fantasy, and absurd.
Fantasy, and absurd.
Really?
No user replaceable battery. Other phones have no issues whatsoever having a door on the back to allow replacing the battery and sim card.
For Steve having a seem on the back of the phone tarnishes "perfection". For everyone else it means having to return to the apple store for a battery.
Edit: Eliminating the SIM altogether allows them to finally remove that last pesky "hole" in the phone. How can't you see this design theme, since every Mac book also has no observable cooling vents?
Lame. I took my phone, stuck in the SIM card and that was all it took to "activate" it. Installing itunes to do the same thing is absurd.
Oh, and the latest iphone 4 commercial "claims" it is the thinnest phone (it isn't). Saying they don't care about it is simply untrue.
Or isn't that the whole point of the mac book air commercial?
edit: Thanks pmz. I didn?t even notice their trollish hyperbole. Anyone who claims that Apple doesn?t focus on their product usability is surely just trolling.
Of course they do. That's why they gave away free bumpers for their retarded antenna design.
"You're just holding it wrong!" - Steve
This is an engineer speaking, but once the SIM is not physically inserted and removed, it's under software control what's in there. There is no force-eject that's reliable, there is no using of a plan that wasn't intended for the specific device you're using because the software will first verify the device type and refuse to program your embedded SIM if it's not to the carrier's and/or Apple's liking.
This is already the case. A locked phone is a locked phone.
It will be also quite difficult to pull the SIM out of your dead phone and insert it into a friend's or stranger's phone to make a quick call until you have a chance to recharge or fix your own phone.
This is the only point where the user could lose out. If the phone itself dies (but they still have access to it) and the user didn?t back up their data or have access to that backup then the couldn?t simply pop the SIM out and put into a new device, but I bet that particular scenario is even less common than those that cried for a removable battery in their Mac notebook despite never before buying an extra battery.
If Apple wants to make it easier for travelers, make bigger phones that accept multiple SIM and can be active on more than one net concurrently.
You want something akin to multi-CD changer in your cellphone. That?s just silly.
I just don't buy this. Apple has the power here- if the carriers want to stop paying the subsidies they are contracted to pay, then they are breaking a contract term that would be significant and material. There would be damages.
What do you want to bet the contracts aren't strictly limited to existing models or traditional carrier practices (such as the use of SIM cards).
Better watch out for those black UN helicopters -- I think the voices inside your head must be telling you they're coming for you (not to suggest actual insanity -- it's probably just the shrill droning of some Australian media magnate's shills :-)
is living how other people tell you to. Sorry, but being angry about an important topic doesn't make you crazy. Current policies may fit whatever agenda you personally have, but by and large they are a detriment to the American citizens. Or, maybe you're just apathetic.
It's not as if there aren't plenty of reputable news organizations writing about the TSA. And if you would allow your wife or child to be publicly groped or scanned you are a coward.
Truthfully, I don't have much to say much about politics in general, but these developments need to be broadcast everywhere, all of the time until people at least put some thought into the notion of putting pressure on their governments to let them know what they will and won't tolerate.
What do you want to bet the contracts aren't strictly limited to existing models or traditional carrier practices (such as the use of SIM cards).
So you mean that the contracts actually specify that the phone must use a carrier provided sim card?
I hadn't thought about that. I was more focusing on the fact that the contracts would specify the subsidies, and include multiple phone models year over year. But yeah- the idea that Apple maybe altering a material part of the contract if they stop using sims... interesting...
The carrier's can achieve exactly what they are trying to achieve with a paper contract that guarantees them x amount of dollars in monthly instalments.
All a virtual sim might achieve is stop asshole carriers from hindering your ability to access an additional carrier should you travel overseas.
Who cares if it isn't subsidised anyway? It's the total cost of ownership that matters. Is anyone dumb enough to go out and buy a "free" phone without considering how the wholesale price is built into the ongoing monthly fee.
So you mean that the contracts actually specify that the phone must use a carrier provided sim card?
I hadn't thought about that. I was more focusing on the fact that the contracts would specify the subsidies, and include multiple phone models year over year. But yeah- the idea that Apple maybe altering a material part of the contract if they stop using sims... interesting...
Hadn't thought about that.
Wouldn't it also have an effect on deployment? ie Retraining employees, changing certain systems, etc. without any material benefit to the carrier...