iPhone- What would make it "Apple"
We all want steve to announce the iPhone. We all deep down know that it would be a pure device, something only apple can achive. I have no doubt that the device will be fantastic, however I would love to disucss what soft features will make the phone "Apple".
Here are my thoughts
The plans- The plans will be simple and easy to understand, no BS no stupid fine print. Apple will create their Own network, much like Helio has.
$49/m- 1000 minutes- free txt msgs - Nights/Weekends- 10mb data
$99/m- 2500 minutes- free txt msgs - Nights/Weekends- Unlimited data
The apple touch- I think apple will utilize the data capabilites to tie into .Mac. Why not, all of the important data is there already, or it could be. Whenever you enter an area with data coverage it checks and updates your .mac both directions. WITHOUT USING YOUR DATA LIMITS. This would be a very apple thing to do. This would really be fantastic knowing the data is up to the second accurate and can be shared with your office or home. Can't get in touch with your office or home, change your cal and they can check where you are.
.Mac? Yes, the infrastructure is there. Imagine taking a photo with the phone and the picture being in your iphoto library when you get home, no transfers to worry about nothing. Buy a song through the phone, and it will also download on your mac when you check for songs.
One More Thing... Dot Mac is FREE for all iPhone subscribers. We all want .mac to be free and the iphone would allow apple to extend the benefits to the people who could really appreciate the integration .mac lends.
Thoughts?
Here are my thoughts
The plans- The plans will be simple and easy to understand, no BS no stupid fine print. Apple will create their Own network, much like Helio has.
$49/m- 1000 minutes- free txt msgs - Nights/Weekends- 10mb data
$99/m- 2500 minutes- free txt msgs - Nights/Weekends- Unlimited data
The apple touch- I think apple will utilize the data capabilites to tie into .Mac. Why not, all of the important data is there already, or it could be. Whenever you enter an area with data coverage it checks and updates your .mac both directions. WITHOUT USING YOUR DATA LIMITS. This would be a very apple thing to do. This would really be fantastic knowing the data is up to the second accurate and can be shared with your office or home. Can't get in touch with your office or home, change your cal and they can check where you are.
.Mac? Yes, the infrastructure is there. Imagine taking a photo with the phone and the picture being in your iphoto library when you get home, no transfers to worry about nothing. Buy a song through the phone, and it will also download on your mac when you check for songs.
One More Thing... Dot Mac is FREE for all iPhone subscribers. We all want .mac to be free and the iphone would allow apple to extend the benefits to the people who could really appreciate the integration .mac lends.
Thoughts?
Comments
One More Thing... Dot Mac is FREE for all iPhone subscribers. We all want .mac to be free and the iphone would allow apple to extend the benefits to the people who could really appreciate the integration .mac lends.
Thoughts?
I've thought about that, but if this is so then iChat would go Windows too.
The apple touch- I think apple will utilize the data capabilites to tie into .Mac. Why not, all of the important data is there already, or it could be. Whenever you enter an area with data coverage it checks and updates your .mac both directions. WITHOUT USING YOUR DATA LIMITS.
Ya know what would be even better?
If they gave the iPhone away for free... and paid US for each minute of airtime used.
It's about time Apple rewarded it's loyal customers!!!1!
- iPod with phone capability
- Small notebook that is actually less than 3 ibs. (1.4 kg.)
Probably never happen.An Apple logo for one would make it an "Apple" iPhone
Indeed.
$49/m- 1000 minutes- free txt msgs - Nights/Weekends- 10mb data
$99/m- 2500 minutes- free txt msgs - Nights/Weekends- Unlimited data
Thoughts?
Well how do I say this and not sound condescending???? Hmmm... Well, okay, I can't. So here goes... Ask your mom and dad if you can see the cell phone bill they're clearly paying for you and look at the number of minutes and features and then look at the cost.
$99 for 2,500 anytime minutes + unlimited IM + unlimited N/W+ Unlimited Data!?!?!? Hell you should thrown in 'roll-over' and 'penalty free laptop tethering' too.
Dave
$99 for 2,500 anytime minutes + unlimited IM + unlimited N/W+ Unlimited Data!?!?!? Hell you should thrown in 'roll-over' and 'penalty free laptop tethering' too.
Dave
The fact that you think this sort of plan is impossible at $100 is very telling. It shows how disruptive apple could be in the cell phone world. Why? Phone carriers do NOT make money off of the phones. Again, they do not care what phone they sell you. (unless it uses their data network which they would like). So, if they do not make money off of the phone where does the money to keep them in business come from? THE PLANS. These companies have to make enough profit on the plans to keep them in business and support their thousand of locations and employees. Now lets take a look at apple and the music store. Apple decided to set the price where it felt people would actually be willing to pay for their service. Apple makes next to nothing on the music store. They have revealed this in their 10-K. So why do they do it? To sell hardware. The iPod has gross margins upward of 30%. They are willing to breakeven on the store to sell the iPods. So that brings us back to the phone plans. Apple will want to sell the iPhone, they want you to buy every new version of the iPhone that comes out, and they want you to feel as though there really is no other sain option. To do this they will sell the airtime and what are currently "premium features" at or below cost, TO SELL THE iPHONES. The amazing thing is it will work. People will ditch their shitty providers who are artificially keeping the prices high and defect to Apple. Not only would Apple win people over for the device it self, but for the killer service too. Apple could really change the mobile industry, if they really want to.
The fact that you think this sort of plan is impossible at $100 is very telling... SNIP... To do this they will sell the airtime and what are currently "premium features" at or below cost, TO SELL THE iPHONES. The amazing thing is it will work. People will ditch their shitty providers who are artificially keeping the prices high and defect to Apple. Not only would Apple win people over for the device it self, but for the killer service too. Apple could really change the mobile industry, if they really want to.
What's very telling is that you think the plan has any chance of working...
First, Apple owns ZERO FCC cellular frequencies. The FCC sell them (actually not 'sells' but instead gives long term leases IIRC) at auctions and sometimes for BILLIONS of dollars (in specific highly populated markets). In order for you to do any type of cellular service you have to the the rights to one of those frequencies and just because you have the rights for Podunk Iowa does NOT mean you have the right in the rest of the US (let alone the world).
Translation: it costs MANY MULTI BILLIONS of DOLLARS just to obtain the FCC rights (aka - a piece of paper saying you are allowed to do something) to then spend BILLIONS of more dollars for towers, equipment, testing and maintenance. (again this is just for the USA no mention of the rest of the world)
These frequencies have long since been spoken for and Apple isn't going to magically come into possession of them (unless they plan on buying up Cingular, Verizon Wireless, T-Moble or Sprint ( since these are the major rights owners )
So what can they do? Make a deal with one or more of the major carriers that allows them to bulk-buy (and resell) access to the major carriers network. Apple would get some kind of 'bulk rate' pricing and then re-sell the service for somewhere between a ZERO % to XXX % markup.
Trust me on this when I say Apple will NOT sell the minutes at a LOSS (just ain't gonna happen) so the best we could hope for is a ZERO or VERY-LOW percent markup (just to cover the admin expenses and thats it).
Now on to the real question:
Exactly how cheap do you think the 'big cellular players' are willing to 'bulk-sell' usage on their networks? I can tell you right now that it isn't going to be so cheap to allow for pricing anywhere near the levels of '2500 anytime and free NW and unlimited data' for $99 per month.
Oh sure people are gonna crawl out of the woodwork telling me of specials in their tiny corner of the US where such deals are common (and as it happens FCC auction prices were next to nothing) BUT in any MAJOR METRO AREA/REGION (where FCC auction prices were BILLIONS) those kind of deals will never exist (not with the existing FCC frequencies and rules).
Dave
And now Cingular wants to charge me an extra US$5.00/month because I am still on a TDMA network?
Not to metion that they want to charge me an extra US$10.00/month to get the same deal that I have with AT&T; needless to say, I am still a holdout on becoming an actual Cingular customer?
Come on Apple, don't let me down?!
Think I can get a discount if I show the Apple Store folks my cool Apple/Power of the Mac Way tattoo on the back of my right calf??!?
It is about 3.5" x 3.5", black, with the 'Power of the Mac Way' kanji on the side opposite of the bite?
Yes, the kanji is the same as from the old Mackido website?!
I like it, and most folks dig it?
ring tones and music ....big profit margin. 99cents itunes vs $3 downloaded cell phone song with tinny speakers
voip__the big push by everyone
profit margin and market share. the cost to apple to do both isn't that much
now this is what i believe the iphone will contain
BT, wifi, software to switch from voip to cell service seemlessly. apple will have it's own skype type software, flash memory, pocket safari, pocket itunes, and probably voice activation, speaker independent calling and software access. will sync with .mac (that's a great idea to make .mac free to iphone subscribers)
why am i saying this? because more and more cell carriers/ phone companies (eg nokia) are intergrating wifi to allow voip, this requires much less in $$$$ to reach more people and access broadband, costs less than towers.
voip is still new, and it's a place apple and SJ can "add value"
the big question is which network???? maybe a deal with RIM
i am sure apple will have an iphone and will go MVNO for the following reasons
ring tones and music ....big profit margin. 99cents itunes vs $3 downloaded cell phone song with tinny speakers
voip__the big push by everyone
profit margin and market share. the cost to apple to do both isn't that much
now this is what i believe the iphone will contain
BT, wifi, software to switch from voip to cell service seemlessly. apple will have it's own skype type software, flash memory, pocket safari, pocket itunes, and probably voice activation, speaker independent calling and software access. will sync with .mac (that's a great idea to make .mac free to iphone subscribers)
why am i saying this? because more and more cell carriers/ phone companies (eg nokia) are intergrating wifi to allow voip, this requires much less in $$$$ to reach more people and access broadband, costs less than towers.
voip is still new, and it's a place apple and SJ can "add value"
the big question is which network???? maybe a deal with RIM
if anyone can figure out how to do VOIP right, Apple will. Esp since they have no real incentive to sell more minutes, therefore they can really push VOIP as a real solution and not as an oddity. I think they will keep it as seemless as possible, so as not to confuse the average consumer.
Also we have not mentioned the other main reason apple can suceded.
The Apple Store
Apple already has the infrastructure to sell this device.
Do you people (you as a 'general you') have any idea what a cell phone REALLY costs? I'm not talking about a Verizon/Cingular/T-Moble/Sprint subsidized phone (aka free or a few hundred bucks with 2 year contract) but a 'no stings attached' use wherever you like with whoever you like phone (aka unlocked). When first released a quad-band with all the bells and whistles phone can EASILY retail UNLOCKED for $800 or more I've even seen $1400 for some hot new phones when they first hit the market. Now, even after being on the market and a HUGELY successful seller (like the RAZR) still sells for about $200 unlocked.
What kind of markup (retail unlocked price) do these existing phones have? I dunno but it could indeed be quite high. After all Nokia Mot and the rest know that all but the cell-phone-nuts (yep they exist and often pay ridiculous prices for new phones just so they can say they have it) are going to get a subsidized model from their current carrier (where the price Nokia et-al sells the phone for is quite a bit lower than an unlocked retail/wholesale model - due to contracts and/or huge volumes carriers are dealing with)
I dunno... it would be interesting to see EXACTLY what the "component and production costs" are for a hot and expensive new cell phone. Maybe then we'd have some idea if Apple could really make a go of this or not.
Dave
The other thing is of course the phones cost...
Dave
They must not cost too much in the big scheme of things.
http://www.letstalk.com/
On that site you can get any plan from any provider and get the phones for free. No matter how many lines you purchase. And not just the crappy ones the providers throw in. The good ones.
The plans are where they make their money.
It will be interesting to see how Apple gets involved in this. I have been holding off on updating my phone with Verizon for a couple of years.
Revenues from conventional telephony are collapsing. Charging people to send voice data across the world is something that its becoming difficult to make money doing.
Internet telephony is free. Internation calls are now pennies.
Mobile/Cellular networks can still charge - but they have to desperately have to pay back the massive investment in creating the network. It's not a great business.
Apple would be dumb to create a new netwok, and while reselling someone else's network is an option, it is hardly the radical disruptive technology that Apple are famous for.
Apple *could* become a handset manufacturer. But would this be a smart move? Apple don't make PDAs (anymore). Don't make cameras (anymore) and have never made a phone. Modern phones, lousy as they are, require a large investment. I am not sure that Apple could do anything so radical as to carve out a sizable chunk of this market at the first attempt.
To me, a home/office wireless handset that works through an Airport network is a more likely Apple product than a cellphone.
C.
Sorry but I don't get it. There is not good business case for Apple moving into telephony.
C.
This sounds alot like pre iPod talk. "apple shouldn't get into the MP3 business it would be crazy, they won't make money, they should stick to making computers"
Apple can certainly innovate in the phone market. They will create a smooth phone which is attractive. But their most valuable contribution will be the interface. We all forget how amazingly good the iPod interface is these days, we take it for granted. Everyday I hear someone complain about how difficult their phone is. This is why apple should get into the mobile phone market. They will simplify the interface for phones. And people will thank them for it. Pure and simple.
Personally, I see Apple putting a phone on an existing US carrier... probably Cingular, since they're the largest carrier, and Apple already has a relationship with them. The fact that they aren't in bed with M$ (yet) for music unlike Sprint or (especially) Verizon helps, too.
However, Cingular's been dragging their feet on their 3G HSDPA rollout, which is needed for high-bandwidth features such as the rumored over-the-air iTMS downloads. They promised last fall that all of their top 100 markets would have HSDPA by now, but only 18 markets have it now (they cite "integration issues"). Cingular pledged about a month ago to roll it out to many more markets by the holidays, but everything's been silent since.
This sounds alot like pre iPod talk. "apple shouldn't get into the MP3 business it would be crazy, they won't make money, they should stick to making computers"
Apple can certainly innovate in the phone market. They will create a smooth phone which is attractive. But their most valuable contribution will be the interface. We all forget how amazingly good the iPod interface is these days, we take it for granted. Everyday I hear someone complain about how difficult their phone is. This is why apple should get into the mobile phone market. They will simplify the interface for phones. And people will thank them for it. Pure and simple.
I do agree that current cellphones are lousy (I said this) and could benefit from being Appled-up(TM) - a well-designed user interface could radically improve the mobile phone experience.
But.... that does not necessarily make a good business case. What are the margins for cellphone manufacture? What sort of investment is required? What is the cost of diverting your engineers away from your core business?
iPod makes sense in part because of iTunes and vice versa. With a phone how would this work ?
This reminds me of another suggestion that Apple should move heavily into videogames. It's the same sort of argument. But again the economic arguments win the day.
C.
i am sure apple will have an iphone and will go MVNO for the following reasons
ring tones and music ....big profit margin. 99cents itunes vs $3 downloaded cell phone song with tinny speakers
The cost are that plus data costs and you pay per the k-bite.
Now that's what I call a cellphone. It does calls. That's about it. Two internal antenna. Weeks of standby time. An e-paper monochrome display you can read in sunlight, and that doesn't use much battery. Sun and dust resistant. Cheap, because it's for third world countries.
Frankly I could happily ditch all other features of my cell for battery life and reception. Don't get me wrong I get perfectly decent battery life and reception, but I also have a camera/videocamera (that I only use for photo caller ID), internet browser (pointless to use), colour screen (pointless), etc...
I want a cellphone to make calls well, and be small. I want my music player to play music well, and be small. I want my camera to take good pictures (with the limitations inherent in anything smaller then a DSLR), and be small.
Currently I have three devices (Razr, Nano, DSC-T9). I can live with that - and smaller versions of same (i.e. Razr-->Fone, Mini-->Nano), until a convergence device that does all three for the same size as any two of them and as well as all three.
I don't expect it for a while since it seems the individual phone/MP3 player/camera downward size curve (note, I don't care beyond the the basic feature - i.e. to make calls, to listen to music, to take pictures. Extra features beyond doing those as well as possible are useless to me) remains steeper then the convergence device downwards size curve.
i.e. three devices for three things remains more usable/fuctional/and better at their one main job (and possibly smaller) then one device that does all three.
Notably one device the same physical size as all three seperate devices combined that does all three primary features from them (calls, music, photos) but that remains just as usable, functional, with equivalent quality work as the separate devices... It doesn't exist.
Also adding features slows the downwards size curve, and hurts the basic functionality. Compare the Motorola FONE that basically just makes calls and text messages to the Motorola Slvr in the same form factor. The SLVR is notably larger, and has much worse battery life and only one antenna (=worse reception) because of the extraneous to making calls "features".
Look at the iPod for another example. Excluding the shuffle which is an example (to me) of simplicity one step too far, the iPod shrinks in size and add features rarely. Regular iPod shrinks as much as possible given limitations of internal components to support large amounts of virtual space. Pictures, video, address book, notes, etc...: All added because the room is there, but their use is a) optional, and b) doesn't detract from the primary music playing function and c) doesn't affect the physical size and usability of the iPod - if you don't use the video feature it doesn't use physical space - unlike say a camera on a phone. The Mini/Nano accept a smaller base size of internal virtual space (physical storage size/medium/type) and shrinks from there, no real difference otherwise. The Mini and Nano actually tossed features (storage space, basically) in order to speed up the downward size curve.
That elimination of features for a smaller sized and more focused device is the reason I think Apple would do a phone well.
If the hypothetical convergence device is also a pair of location aware spex that reads tags off everything, and has data on everything I do and everyone I ever talk to... Well that would be cool.
Anyway. Apple iPhone. Probably cool. I'd say they either go whole hog convergence device thing (but not a smartphone/Blackberry) with good camera for iPhoto and so forth - the extension of your multimedia life - or they go the FONE route crossed with an iPod. Awesome at phone calls and music playing. Address book syncs to computer. And that's it.
But really, what do I know
Let the iPhone debate continue!