I was thinking about this today. At first I thought Apple iGPS was a dumb idea. I've changed my mind. I think a device about the size of the iPod (perhaps a little bigger) with a larger color display.
Imagine an application...iMap...iTravel...whatever. Something that enables me to plan/plot trips with stop points...integration with various location databases (hotels, ATMs, restaurants, etc.)...make the maps and location data free...that is a key part of it. Garmin makes some great devices it looks like...but it appears that you need to spend another $100-$300 for map data and software. Apple needs to "comoditize" the data to sell the devices. This has two benefits...makes the hardware more attractive...and makes things much easier for users. Bring it come...plug it in...start planning a trip and go.
Make the device syncable with a computer (like iPod). Allow me to plan multiple trips and route them as I travel.
Did you know... that in iPhoto the information about pictures as GPS fields under the exposure tab. I just found this today. One google later shows me this. So Ricoh has made a digital camera with GPS built in.
Kind of curious as to how there is a way to populate those other than having the feature within the camera.
If you wee to have this sort of system in your car you would want a screen larger than the current iPod form to make it useful. Would you have the GPS reciever thing in the iPod itself or in the equipment associated with the screen? Would you store the maps on the iPod or on DVD(s)?
The way I see it a GPS reciever would probably take a fair amount of battery power to run. People already complain that the iPod doesn't last long enough between charges, surely this will shorten that time further?
The only way this would be truely useful IMO would be if you could walk around with it too. This would require the GPS to be in the iPod along with the data and it would need a bigger screen if you want to display maps. Bigger screen would take more power too. If you are adding a bigger screen why not make it color (more power?). The mock up above shows a touch screen (more power) with a scroll wheel area for... scrolling. Which way would this scroll go, vertical or horizontal?
The iPod interface works well because Apple took away all the crap stuff that listening to music doesn't need and broke the problem down into simple questions. "If I want to listen to music what do I need?" and "if I want to control which track is next/previous and display the tracks, what do I need?". The answers are obvious and the result elegant.
Now do the same for GPS.
The iPod can play music in the car but that was an after thought (the BMW "solution" is not exactly elegant. With that I'd want a T-Shirt that read "I just shelled out 50G's for a new car and all I got to plug my iPod in was this lousy cable in my glove box"). The iPod can record audio but that too seems to have been an after thought (higher bit rate for recording live performances would have been nice). You can read text but not write it, you can store images but not view them.
You can do anything you want with an iPod as long as it involves listening to audio and/or storing data.
The iPod is great at what it does. If you tried to make it do the GPS the way you seem to want you would have to change the size and the interface. I hear all the time that the iPod has won some award for its interface or is receiving some sort of applause from some techno geek magazine or, more importantly, another mainstream media outlet. Without the interface and the form there really isn't much left to the iPod, it's just a hard drive and headphone socket. Apple would have to add some seriously good stuff to the iPod to justify it's amalgamation with GPS and maps etc.
Who knows what is in store for the iPod. Maybe the reason we have the iPod mini is because the iPod will be discontinued and replaced by a new product that does all the things that I hear people complain that the iPod doesn't (play videos, display images, GPS etc etc etc). So the iPod mini will be the music player and the iPod becomes the item that contains your phone, pocket PC, music, video etc. Whatever happens, I don't think the current interface will support it and I don't think it will be called the iPod.
If you wee to have this sort of system in your car you would want a screen larger than the current iPod form to make it useful. Would you have the GPS reciever thing in the iPod itself or in the equipment associated with the screen? Would you store the maps on the iPod or on DVD(s)?
Now do the same for GPS.
The iPod can play music in the car but that was an after thought (the BMW "solution" is not exactly elegant. With that I'd want a T-Shirt that read "I just shelled out 50G's for a new car and all I got to plug my iPod in was this lousy cable in my glove box"). The iPod can record audio but that too seems to have been an after thought (higher bit rate for recording live performances would have been nice). You can read text but not write it, you can store images but not view them.
You can do anything you want with an iPod as long as it involves listening to audio and/or storing data.
The iPod is great at what it does. If you tried to make it do the GPS the way you seem to want you would have to change the size and the interface. I hear all the time that the iPod has won some award for its interface or is receiving some sort of applause from some techno geek magazine or, more importantly, another mainstream media outlet. Without the interface and the form there really isn't much left to the iPod, it's just a hard drive and headphone socket. Apple would have to add some seriously good stuff to the iPod to justify it's amalgamation with GPS and maps etc.
I see the iPod having the ability to interface with the GPS screen in the newer cars that have GPS navigation. What I would get is I could plan trips on my Mac and then save them to my iPod and have the trips projected on the GPS screen in the car. I see value here especially if my trip takes me to many different places. The current iPod screen would not be great to navigate to but maybe it would keep track of where it is for me.
Forget iPod. Make it a separate/new device. Could use the iPod hardware/software platform and business model. But make it something different. I don't want to have to figure out if I am in "GPS mode" or "music mode".
Something simple, elegant. Larger screen. Internal HD to store maps. Maps are free...not $100-$300 is addition to the hardware.
Do an iCal kind of thing...people could publish "routes" for others to share.
Can be used in the car, bike, hand, etc.
$399-$499 for the first one.
P.S. As for power...one of the Garmin handheld GPS devices I was looking at claims a 30 hour life on 2 AA batteries.
The problem is that once you build a small, fast GPS device, you're about 90% done making a handheld. You're also at 90% of the cost of a handheld. All that's left is an Airport Card/Bluetooth, and a few simple apps based on Mail, Safari, Address Book, iCal and iTunes. Although such a device would be amazing, Apple is just not in a good position to launch such a product. However, I fear that the growth of PocketPC over the last two years may crush Palm. Soon, we may need another player in the PDA game.
The problem is that once you build a small, fast GPS device, you're about 90% done making a handheld. You're also at 90% of the cost of a handheld. All that's left is an Airport Card/Bluetooth, and a few simple apps based on Mail, Safari, Address Book, iCal and iTunes.
Here I would have to say..."So?" Just because a device is 90% of a "computer" (or PDA) doesn't mean it needs to be one. At some point the technology is so cheap that replicating it makes more sense...and allowing each device to be true to its core purpose is a better design.
The ideas expressed herein reflect two different design strategies and philosophies. One, which I call the "Swiss Army Knife" school of design, holds that it is better to have a single device that does many things (no matter how divergent or orthogonal those things are. Microsoft seems deeply entrenched in this school of thought. The other is one which holds that each device ought ot be "true to itself and its purpose" (i.e., a camera is a camera, a phone is a phone, etc.) Apple seems more in that camp.
Now there are obvious exceptions that may make some sense. But they have less to do with the underlying technology ("you're about 90% done making a handheld"...ergo...make it a handheld.) than...let's call it "synergistic usage"...camera phones might be this. The idea of slapping a camera into a mobile phone seems stupid, at first (at least to the "let each device be true to itself" folks)...and brilliant to the "Swiss Army Knife" folks. But it might right...for reasons not immediately obvious to the "Swiss Army Knife" folks (who think it is cool because...well both devices are about 90% of the same technology!) The "synergistic usage" is what makes it work. I can take a picture and instantly send it to my friends! I don't see this with an iPod + GPS, for example. GPS + phone? Maybe, yes.
See, my point is that it is not the commonality of the technology that ought to drive the combination of features, but rather the "synergy" of the features. The technology is becoming so cheap that embedding into various (distinct) devices makes economic sense too.
Would I care that I had a digital still camera that was basically (from a technology perspective) an iPod with a lens and a CCD? Not really. I just care that I have a decent, fun, easy to use camera that seemlessly (even wirelessly?) integrates with my computer (iPhoto).
Would I care that I had a handheld GPS device that was basically (from a technology perspective) an iPod with a GPS receiver and a larger (color) screen? Not really. I just care that I have a decent, fun, easy to use travel companion that seemlessly (even wirelessly?) integrates with my computer (iMap?).
Quote:
Although such a device would be amazing, Apple is just not in a good position to launch such a product.
I think Apple is in a great position to do so, though I do not think they will, and they probably should not. They have stated that they believe the handheld (palm/PDA) market is dying. They seem to be right.
Quote:
However, I fear that the growth of PocketPC over the last two years may crush Palm. Soon, we may need another player in the PDA game.
"True to itself" is a great design philosophy for everything but handheld devices. I already lug around a phone, palm, iPod and camera. I'd like a GPS, but the last thing I need is another device.
The PDA market is dying only because phones now offer most PDA functions. As phones become more PDA-like, PDAs will no longer be necessary. Consolidating handheld devices is necessary so long as humans only have two hands. Not to mention it costs well over $1200 to buy all these devices individually. A single, $600 device would be more than welcome to both my pockets and my pocketbook.
Why does their need to be another PDA platform if Palm goes bottom-up? Do you really want Microsoft dominating yet another market?
"True to itself" is a great design philosophy for everything but handheld devices. I already lug around a phone, palm, iPod and camera. I'd like a GPS, but the last thing I need is another device.
I understand this, and it certainly causes me some degree of pause with the "every thing be true to itself" thing. But the trade off..."jack of all trades, master of none" (not to mention poor usability)...still causes me to side with this design philosophy.
Secondly, it seems that most people aren't likely to be carrying around all of these devices at the same time.
Quote:
The PDA market is dying only because phones now offer most PDA functions. As phones become more PDA-like, PDAs will no longer be necessary.
You've answered part of the multi-device problem stated above...as well as why Apple seems unlikely to create a DPA themselves.
Quote:
Consolidating handheld devices is necessary so long as humans only have two hands.
Good point. Goes with first point. However it also presupposes the fact that people will, in fact, desire to have all of these devices with them at all times. Perhaps true. Perhaps not. Still...the argument about convergence must consider appropriate feature convergence. The camera + phone example seems to work (much to my surprise BTW). I could see GPS + phone (I have the phone with me as a I travel anyway. I can see having downloaded my travel route into and having GPS me the whole way). But...what if I need to do both things at the same time? This is the dilemma created by convergent devices. Still, iPod + GPS still makes little sense to me. I could be convinced...but I am not at this point.
Quote:
Not to mention it costs well over $1200 to buy all these devices individually. A single, $600 device would be more than welcome to both my pockets and my pocketbook.
Another good point, and one I consider as well. But, again, what if someone wants a $400 music player but not a $600 music player + camera + GPS + phone + PDA? They will have paid $200 more for a device that does a ton of things they do not desire...and probably none of them terribly well ("jack of all trades, master of none" again).
Quote:
Why does their need to be another PDA platform if Palm goes bottom-up? Do you really want Microsoft dominating yet another market?
Well, here again, it seems the market is dying. I'd rather have MS distracted and diverting resources into a dying market than a thriving one. Though, admittedly, they have so many resources they can do both.
Ultimately, Apple is making its decisions (so it appears anyway) based on its ability to profit from a market...not prevention of MS dominance (though, of course, MS is always a factor to be concerned about). They are doing this rightly. How can they offer something compelling, profitable and sustainable. Possibly they have considered the GPS market and written it off. They appear to have done with with mobile phones and PDAs. Perhaps cameras as well. This is smart business. They are acting as if it is not all about the technology. They are certainly capable of doing ALL of those devices well...and I have no doubt you'd find prototypes in their labs. But other conditions may prevent them from really profiting.
Some of these things make sense. Others maybe not. Hard to say. Some might not work well now but will in 5 -10 years. Some are limited by cost (iFrame < $100, iPhone for Home < $150). I don't know...just brain-dumping here.
My idea is of a digital moleskine... something for enhance the travelling experience with maps, address, notetaking a digital camera and so on.
So I agree with nsousansousa, that could be something good.
The problem i think is that new 3G cellphone have gps today and with a cellphone you can surf web find info, maps (TomTom navigator can be used with cellphone), watch video and listen to music... If you add an HD with 5GB you have an iPod killer and whateverappledevice killer...
Only coolness can save iPod and other Apple future devices...
And I don't think today apple will introduce a cellphone (there are a lot... But they can make new technology for them (QT for 3G, syncing solutions, itunes for symbian for example..). Or they can develop new technology linked with wi-fi (a home phone, VoIP)..
My idea is of a digital moleskine... something for enhance the travelling experience with maps, address, notetaking a digital camera and so on.
So I agree with nsousansousa, that could be something good.
The problem i think is that new 3G cellphone have gps today and with a cellphone you can surf web find info, maps (TomTom navigator can be used with cellphone), watch video and listen to music... If you add an HD with 5GB you have an iPod killer and whateverappledevice killer...
Only coolness can save iPod and other Apple future devices...
And I don't think today apple will introduce a cellphone (there are a lot... But they can make new technology for them (QT for 3G, syncing solutions, itunes for symbian for example..). Or they can develop new technology linked with wi-fi (a home phone, VoIP)..
Point well made. And this is where I think Apple is good. I hate cellphones that have everything but the kitchen sink. This is why the iPod is great . It's for music. Period.
Personal GPS is a thing of the future. I think more and more GPS applications are going to appear such as :
Real usefull Points of interest. Bus routes, taxi fares and locations.
Day planners. with GPS
All of this beyond the current applications of positioning and routing.
And .MAC is the icing on the cake.
Sync your maps, routes, planners online. Download new locations for business and the like. Think if Apple created a world directory where you could go online and post your business location that could be downloaded all around the world from the iGPS units.
There is a real opportunity here and Apple shouldn't let this one pass them by.
The idea of "each being true to itself", and synergy of devices.
I think that everything happening will take a radical reorientation of design philosophy.
It boils down to the smart core, with dumb peripherals.
The ipod makes sense as the smart core ( as does a phone ). You should be able to buy an ipod and have it work just like it does now.
When I look at a phone I see two components ( ignoring extra features ), audio input and output, and a wireless network. It makes complete sense to integrate both into the ipod, well, it already has audio input and output, so it just needs wireless networking. What form that takes is difficult to determine. Interfacing with the phone takes two forms, you can use the existing scroll wheel/address book entries, or voice dialing. iPod music playing is automatically paused for incoming and outgoing calls. The ipod has no facilities for data input, and I wouldnt change that, keep it true to its audio roots.
What about all those other features? Well, you add those with domain specific peripherals. Just like we do with the ipod today, but communicating with bluetooth, or a personal bus ( MS just patented electronic communication over skin ).
- gps, you can already buy small bluetooth units. The ipod does all the data recording for you. Its limited interface seems well suited to maps.
- sms, buy a small keyboard with dedicated text screen, and get a good text experience. The ipod handles transmission, and a lifelong history of messages.
- pda, input could be through a secondary touch screen, but I really like a bluetooth pen. You write normal notes on notepads, anywhere, anyhow, and the ipod captures it.
The ipod becomes a repository for personal information, and a way of communicating that information with the world. For people on the move audio is the interface of choice. The possibility of voice recognition has been touted for years, but it is only in the mobile environment that I see it being successful.
I think that Apple will milk the iPod for all of the development money they can get for QuickTime. The iPod will morph into other things to try to keep the lead as long as possible. When a real contender showes up Apple could then open up iTunes so that others products will be able to use it. That would then spread QuickTime usage fast. So take the revenue from the iPod to pay for QuickTime develpoment and then when that runs out quicktime should be killer by then and just needs many other high profile companies to help Apple to push the adoption, a clever end around on MS. Now seeing this yea the iPod should get many functions like GPS anything to add value and be different. Maps would be nice and maybe another incentive to sign up for .Mac, or maybe the best solution would be for the maps to be sold through the iTunes store. Amazon started off mostly selling books.
Quote:
Originally posted by nsousansousa
I think Apple should do a GPS device.
POINTS:
1 It's a vertical market. Just like Apple enjoys.
2 The market is exploding due to small GPS devices with lots of options mainly in Pocket PC (arghh!) platform.
3 Personal GPS completes the digital personall empowerment. Apple way !
4 There are neat solutions coming . Have you seen this
Thanks for that nsousansousa. I'll have a look at what options I have. I guess all I would need then was a bluetooth receiver as well as bluetooth adapter for me iBook and Route66 Europe. Do the receivers normally require separate antenna?
Thanks for that nsousansousa. I'll have a look at what options I have. I guess all I would need then was a bluetooth receiver as well as bluetooth adapter for me iBook and Route66 Europe. Do the receivers normally require separate antenna?
My opinion ? Go for the bluetooth one. Is simply a more elegant solution and has OS X support. My recomendation ? I have the Sysonchip + PC card but the Bluetooth model has good reviews. See here
You'll be amazed as a 200,250 USD ( Software + GPS ) solution is better than a full fledged in car solution.
Comments
Imagine an application...iMap...iTravel...whatever. Something that enables me to plan/plot trips with stop points...integration with various location databases (hotels, ATMs, restaurants, etc.)...make the maps and location data free...that is a key part of it. Garmin makes some great devices it looks like...but it appears that you need to spend another $100-$300 for map data and software. Apple needs to "comoditize" the data to sell the devices. This has two benefits...makes the hardware more attractive...and makes things much easier for users. Bring it come...plug it in...start planning a trip and go.
Make the device syncable with a computer (like iPod). Allow me to plan multiple trips and route them as I travel.
Kind of curious as to how there is a way to populate those other than having the feature within the camera.
Screed
Ipod + gsm/gprs(has location based info already) = the best thing ever!
steve likes-
1) music
2) cars
Two things go with cars- 1) ipod 2)handsfree cellphone via bluetooth
Put them together in one product add gps if you like and get a killer product
the gsm/gprs /gps/ bluetooth chips are here already
apple will have some competiton in the market but as of yet no one does the two devices well.
The way I see it a GPS reciever would probably take a fair amount of battery power to run. People already complain that the iPod doesn't last long enough between charges, surely this will shorten that time further?
The only way this would be truely useful IMO would be if you could walk around with it too. This would require the GPS to be in the iPod along with the data and it would need a bigger screen if you want to display maps. Bigger screen would take more power too. If you are adding a bigger screen why not make it color (more power?). The mock up above shows a touch screen (more power) with a scroll wheel area for... scrolling. Which way would this scroll go, vertical or horizontal?
The iPod interface works well because Apple took away all the crap stuff that listening to music doesn't need and broke the problem down into simple questions. "If I want to listen to music what do I need?" and "if I want to control which track is next/previous and display the tracks, what do I need?". The answers are obvious and the result elegant.
Now do the same for GPS.
The iPod can play music in the car but that was an after thought (the BMW "solution" is not exactly elegant. With that I'd want a T-Shirt that read "I just shelled out 50G's for a new car and all I got to plug my iPod in was this lousy cable in my glove box"). The iPod can record audio but that too seems to have been an after thought (higher bit rate for recording live performances would have been nice). You can read text but not write it, you can store images but not view them.
You can do anything you want with an iPod as long as it involves listening to audio and/or storing data.
The iPod is great at what it does. If you tried to make it do the GPS the way you seem to want you would have to change the size and the interface. I hear all the time that the iPod has won some award for its interface or is receiving some sort of applause from some techno geek magazine or, more importantly, another mainstream media outlet. Without the interface and the form there really isn't much left to the iPod, it's just a hard drive and headphone socket. Apple would have to add some seriously good stuff to the iPod to justify it's amalgamation with GPS and maps etc.
Who knows what is in store for the iPod. Maybe the reason we have the iPod mini is because the iPod will be discontinued and replaced by a new product that does all the things that I hear people complain that the iPod doesn't (play videos, display images, GPS etc etc etc). So the iPod mini will be the music player and the iPod becomes the item that contains your phone, pocket PC, music, video etc. Whatever happens, I don't think the current interface will support it and I don't think it will be called the iPod.
Originally posted by pooandwee
If you wee to have this sort of system in your car you would want a screen larger than the current iPod form to make it useful. Would you have the GPS reciever thing in the iPod itself or in the equipment associated with the screen? Would you store the maps on the iPod or on DVD(s)?
Now do the same for GPS.
The iPod can play music in the car but that was an after thought (the BMW "solution" is not exactly elegant. With that I'd want a T-Shirt that read "I just shelled out 50G's for a new car and all I got to plug my iPod in was this lousy cable in my glove box"). The iPod can record audio but that too seems to have been an after thought (higher bit rate for recording live performances would have been nice). You can read text but not write it, you can store images but not view them.
You can do anything you want with an iPod as long as it involves listening to audio and/or storing data.
The iPod is great at what it does. If you tried to make it do the GPS the way you seem to want you would have to change the size and the interface. I hear all the time that the iPod has won some award for its interface or is receiving some sort of applause from some techno geek magazine or, more importantly, another mainstream media outlet. Without the interface and the form there really isn't much left to the iPod, it's just a hard drive and headphone socket. Apple would have to add some seriously good stuff to the iPod to justify it's amalgamation with GPS and maps etc.
I see the iPod having the ability to interface with the GPS screen in the newer cars that have GPS navigation. What I would get is I could plan trips on my Mac and then save them to my iPod and have the trips projected on the GPS screen in the car. I see value here especially if my trip takes me to many different places. The current iPod screen would not be great to navigate to but maybe it would keep track of where it is for me.
Something simple, elegant. Larger screen. Internal HD to store maps. Maps are free...not $100-$300 is addition to the hardware.
Do an iCal kind of thing...people could publish "routes" for others to share.
Can be used in the car, bike, hand, etc.
$399-$499 for the first one.
P.S. As for power...one of the Garmin handheld GPS devices I was looking at claims a 30 hour life on 2 AA batteries.
Originally posted by Michael Wilkie
The problem is that once you build a small, fast GPS device, you're about 90% done making a handheld. You're also at 90% of the cost of a handheld. All that's left is an Airport Card/Bluetooth, and a few simple apps based on Mail, Safari, Address Book, iCal and iTunes.
Here I would have to say..."So?" Just because a device is 90% of a "computer" (or PDA) doesn't mean it needs to be one. At some point the technology is so cheap that replicating it makes more sense...and allowing each device to be true to its core purpose is a better design.
The ideas expressed herein reflect two different design strategies and philosophies. One, which I call the "Swiss Army Knife" school of design, holds that it is better to have a single device that does many things (no matter how divergent or orthogonal those things are. Microsoft seems deeply entrenched in this school of thought. The other is one which holds that each device ought ot be "true to itself and its purpose" (i.e., a camera is a camera, a phone is a phone, etc.) Apple seems more in that camp.
Now there are obvious exceptions that may make some sense. But they have less to do with the underlying technology ("you're about 90% done making a handheld"...ergo...make it a handheld.) than...let's call it "synergistic usage"...camera phones might be this. The idea of slapping a camera into a mobile phone seems stupid, at first (at least to the "let each device be true to itself" folks)...and brilliant to the "Swiss Army Knife" folks. But it might right...for reasons not immediately obvious to the "Swiss Army Knife" folks (who think it is cool because...well both devices are about 90% of the same technology!) The "synergistic usage" is what makes it work. I can take a picture and instantly send it to my friends! I don't see this with an iPod + GPS, for example. GPS + phone? Maybe, yes.
See, my point is that it is not the commonality of the technology that ought to drive the combination of features, but rather the "synergy" of the features. The technology is becoming so cheap that embedding into various (distinct) devices makes economic sense too.
Would I care that I had a digital still camera that was basically (from a technology perspective) an iPod with a lens and a CCD? Not really. I just care that I have a decent, fun, easy to use camera that seemlessly (even wirelessly?) integrates with my computer (iPhoto).
Would I care that I had a handheld GPS device that was basically (from a technology perspective) an iPod with a GPS receiver and a larger (color) screen? Not really. I just care that I have a decent, fun, easy to use travel companion that seemlessly (even wirelessly?) integrates with my computer (iMap?).
Although such a device would be amazing, Apple is just not in a good position to launch such a product.
I think Apple is in a great position to do so, though I do not think they will, and they probably should not. They have stated that they believe the handheld (palm/PDA) market is dying. They seem to be right.
However, I fear that the growth of PocketPC over the last two years may crush Palm. Soon, we may need another player in the PDA game.
Why?
The PDA market is dying only because phones now offer most PDA functions. As phones become more PDA-like, PDAs will no longer be necessary. Consolidating handheld devices is necessary so long as humans only have two hands. Not to mention it costs well over $1200 to buy all these devices individually. A single, $600 device would be more than welcome to both my pockets and my pocketbook.
Why does their need to be another PDA platform if Palm goes bottom-up? Do you really want Microsoft dominating yet another market?
Originally posted by Michael Wilkie
"True to itself" is a great design philosophy for everything but handheld devices. I already lug around a phone, palm, iPod and camera. I'd like a GPS, but the last thing I need is another device.
I understand this, and it certainly causes me some degree of pause with the "every thing be true to itself" thing. But the trade off..."jack of all trades, master of none" (not to mention poor usability)...still causes me to side with this design philosophy.
Secondly, it seems that most people aren't likely to be carrying around all of these devices at the same time.
The PDA market is dying only because phones now offer most PDA functions. As phones become more PDA-like, PDAs will no longer be necessary.
You've answered part of the multi-device problem stated above...as well as why Apple seems unlikely to create a DPA themselves.
Consolidating handheld devices is necessary so long as humans only have two hands.
Good point. Goes with first point. However it also presupposes the fact that people will, in fact, desire to have all of these devices with them at all times. Perhaps true. Perhaps not. Still...the argument about convergence must consider appropriate feature convergence. The camera + phone example seems to work (much to my surprise BTW). I could see GPS + phone (I have the phone with me as a I travel anyway. I can see having downloaded my travel route into and having GPS me the whole way). But...what if I need to do both things at the same time? This is the dilemma created by convergent devices. Still, iPod + GPS still makes little sense to me. I could be convinced...but I am not at this point.
Not to mention it costs well over $1200 to buy all these devices individually. A single, $600 device would be more than welcome to both my pockets and my pocketbook.
Another good point, and one I consider as well. But, again, what if someone wants a $400 music player but not a $600 music player + camera + GPS + phone + PDA? They will have paid $200 more for a device that does a ton of things they do not desire...and probably none of them terribly well ("jack of all trades, master of none" again).
Why does their need to be another PDA platform if Palm goes bottom-up? Do you really want Microsoft dominating yet another market?
Well, here again, it seems the market is dying. I'd rather have MS distracted and diverting resources into a dying market than a thriving one. Though, admittedly, they have so many resources they can do both.
Ultimately, Apple is making its decisions (so it appears anyway) based on its ability to profit from a market...not prevention of MS dominance (though, of course, MS is always a factor to be concerned about). They are doing this rightly. How can they offer something compelling, profitable and sustainable. Possibly they have considered the GPS market and written it off. They appear to have done with with mobile phones and PDAs. Perhaps cameras as well. This is smart business. They are acting as if it is not all about the technology. They are certainly capable of doing ALL of those devices well...and I have no doubt you'd find prototypes in their labs. But other conditions may prevent them from really profiting.
Personally I'd love to see Apple do:
- iTravel (GPS device) + iMap (trip planning software...free)
- iPhone (home based) + bluetooth Address Book syncing
- iPhone (mobile) + bluetooth Address Book & iCal syncing
- iCamera (digital still) + wireless iPhoto integration
- iAlarm Clock + iTunes + Airport Express + iCal
- iFrame (digital picture frame) + wireless iPhoto integration
Some of these things make sense. Others maybe not. Hard to say. Some might not work well now but will in 5 -10 years. Some are limited by cost (iFrame < $100, iPhone for Home < $150). I don't know...just brain-dumping here.
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...threadid=38164
we talked even about gps devices.
My idea is of a digital moleskine... something for enhance the travelling experience with maps, address, notetaking a digital camera and so on.
So I agree with nsousansousa, that could be something good.
The problem i think is that new 3G cellphone have gps today and with a cellphone you can surf web find info, maps (TomTom navigator can be used with cellphone), watch video and listen to music... If you add an HD with 5GB you have an iPod killer and whateverappledevice killer...
Only coolness can save iPod and other Apple future devices...
And I don't think today apple will introduce a cellphone (there are a lot... But they can make new technology for them (QT for 3G, syncing solutions, itunes for symbian for example..). Or they can develop new technology linked with wi-fi (a home phone, VoIP)..
Originally posted by nevoz
In this forum:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...threadid=38164
we talked even about gps devices.
My idea is of a digital moleskine... something for enhance the travelling experience with maps, address, notetaking a digital camera and so on.
So I agree with nsousansousa, that could be something good.
The problem i think is that new 3G cellphone have gps today and with a cellphone you can surf web find info, maps (TomTom navigator can be used with cellphone), watch video and listen to music... If you add an HD with 5GB you have an iPod killer and whateverappledevice killer...
Only coolness can save iPod and other Apple future devices...
And I don't think today apple will introduce a cellphone (there are a lot... But they can make new technology for them (QT for 3G, syncing solutions, itunes for symbian for example..). Or they can develop new technology linked with wi-fi (a home phone, VoIP)..
Point well made. And this is where I think Apple is good. I hate cellphones that have everything but the kitchen sink. This is why the iPod is great . It's for music. Period.
Personal GPS is a thing of the future. I think more and more GPS applications are going to appear such as :
Real usefull Points of interest. Bus routes, taxi fares and locations.
Day planners. with GPS
All of this beyond the current applications of positioning and routing.
And .MAC is the icing on the cake.
Sync your maps, routes, planners online. Download new locations for business and the like. Think if Apple created a world directory where you could go online and post your business location that could be downloaded all around the world from the iGPS units.
There is a real opportunity here and Apple shouldn't let this one pass them by.
I think that everything happening will take a radical reorientation of design philosophy.
It boils down to the smart core, with dumb peripherals.
The ipod makes sense as the smart core ( as does a phone ). You should be able to buy an ipod and have it work just like it does now.
When I look at a phone I see two components ( ignoring extra features ), audio input and output, and a wireless network. It makes complete sense to integrate both into the ipod, well, it already has audio input and output, so it just needs wireless networking. What form that takes is difficult to determine. Interfacing with the phone takes two forms, you can use the existing scroll wheel/address book entries, or voice dialing. iPod music playing is automatically paused for incoming and outgoing calls. The ipod has no facilities for data input, and I wouldnt change that, keep it true to its audio roots.
What about all those other features? Well, you add those with domain specific peripherals. Just like we do with the ipod today, but communicating with bluetooth, or a personal bus ( MS just patented electronic communication over skin ).
- gps, you can already buy small bluetooth units. The ipod does all the data recording for you. Its limited interface seems well suited to maps.
- sms, buy a small keyboard with dedicated text screen, and get a good text experience. The ipod handles transmission, and a lifelong history of messages.
- pda, input could be through a secondary touch screen, but I really like a bluetooth pen. You write normal notes on notepads, anywhere, anyhow, and the ipod captures it.
The ipod becomes a repository for personal information, and a way of communicating that information with the world. For people on the move audio is the interface of choice. The possibility of voice recognition has been touted for years, but it is only in the mobile environment that I see it being successful.
Originally posted by nsousansousa
I think Apple should do a GPS device.
POINTS:
1 It's a vertical market. Just like Apple enjoys.
2 The market is exploding due to small GPS devices with lots of options mainly in Pocket PC (arghh!) platform.
3 Personal GPS completes the digital personall empowerment. Apple way !
4 There are neat solutions coming . Have you seen this
Tom Tom Go .EVEN THE BOX IS A iPod rip off.
5 Integration with .Mac . Maps could be downloaded from .Mac free of charge for subscribers.
7 Make it Firewire for connection to PC and Mac.
8 Call it iMap. :-)
Originally posted by nsousansousa
Well, I got a CF/PCMCIA GPS receiver and it works great with the Powerbook and Route 66 Europe.
Would this work with me G4 iBook, with or without an adapter?
Originally posted by kelib
Would this work with me G4 iBook, with or without an adapter?
No, got to have a PC card slot.
If you have bluetooth , get a Bluetooth GPS device.
[EDIT]
Not sure if This device is all I may need
GPS isn't for everyone, but I, too, have long wished Apple would make a GPS product. Don't really see it happening, though.
Originally posted by kelib
Thanks for that nsousansousa. I'll have a look at what options I have. I guess all I would need then was a bluetooth receiver as well as bluetooth adapter for me iBook and Route66 Europe. Do the receivers normally require separate antenna?
[EDIT]
Not sure if This device is all I may need
My opinion ? Go for the bluetooth one. Is simply a more elegant solution and has OS X support. My recomendation ? I have the Sysonchip + PC card but the Bluetooth model has good reviews. See here
You'll be amazed as a 200,250 USD ( Software + GPS ) solution is better than a full fledged in car solution.