Why is it that on patent applications the drawings are always rubbish.
because the patents have to be INSANELY generic, so that you can protect the idea better behind the design. if they get too specific in the drawings, then someone can create a product with the same functionality, but different form factor, and not have anything to worry about.
note: i am not a legal counsel, and my ramblings should be taken simply as that... ramblings.
This is why some people talk loudly and some don't.
Those who are paying attention hear you regardless.
IMHO.
So I suppose the fact that people read it is all that matters? The fact that most dismiss it, doesn't? Or the fact that most people dump on it, doesn't either?
Well, I guess some people might be sitting at home smug that even if their original post was stupid, because of it, they generated a lot of posting in return. Even if most of it is criticism.
I'm not sure I really want an all-in -one unit that does all that is listed in the patent.
I don't think that matters. It isn't as if the markets for separate and integrated devices are mutually exclusive. There are many that want integrated devices, many that don't and many that would choose from one or the other based on a particular need and what's available that fits that need. For example, a camera in a phone doesn't preclude carrying a separate, better camera. The camera in the phone is so small that it doesn't hurt the phone's size much. The same goes for audio devices, a couple thin flash chips doesn't hurt phone's size, they probably have to have at least one anyway. Any user can still opt for an external player if they like.
I doubt that any Apple phone will house a mechanical hard drive. I don't think many would put up with such a large phone that would result.
this may be old news but I just noticed that if you google up "iphone" one of the first links listed is that of "http://www.apple.com/itunes/mobile/"...
That has been there for a while I believe... it was used for the RAZR when it first came out (Im sure someone will correct me if I am wrong. )
Everyone in the world -- including the professional analysts -- seem to be looking at this from a traditionalist perspective, and missing the bigger picture. It's driving me up a wall that no one else is seeing what I am seeing, so here goes:
The iPhone device is not about hardware OR software; not in the long term. It is about positioning Apple to become the dominant player in communications.
Steve is looking ahead to a future where wireless networks will blanket all major metropolitan areas.
The iPhone may or may not launch with a traditional cellular capability. But it will be designed for the long-term integration of a wireless VoIP-type capability as a primary "mode". It will be designed to primarily be a wireless data communications device that can function over any wireless network, and to create a completely integrated mobile data lifestyle.
Why have a cell phone, home phone, etc when you can just have an iPhone which can switch seamlessly between cellular service -- which costs you $ -- and VoIP service in your home, about in your car in a wireless coverage zone, etc? VoIP based cellular service will be cheaper and tied directly to your wireless network subscription ... and most attractively for Apple, they can become the DOMINANT services provider, just like they have for music and other digital media.
In fact, look for Apple to introduce iPhone, and then leverage its existing strength in digital media to make iPhone the dominant hardware platform. Then look for them to launch a new VoIP-type service (possibly integrated with .Mac, but this is so huge they might set up a new thing entirely) centered around Apple hardware products, online media services, and iPhone. Finally, Steve will bring full integration of all data needs into the equation, using iPhone as a leverage device to further boost Mac system sales and market share.
Upon initial introduction of any 802.11 wireless VoIP/data capability, Apple will initially target users to use iPhone in their homes, over their existing wireless 802.11 networks. In the long term, as 802.11 begins to blanket everywhere, iPhone and the Apple VoIP-type service will begin to replace the existing cellular services providers in cities.
This is why Steve is so excited about iPhone that he is chatting about it amongst friends.
His plan is not to become a cellular services provider. His plan is to fundamentally transform and then take over the entire telecommunications business. He understands that iPhone will be 10 times as big of a breakthrough revolutionary product than iPod, and much more central to people's lives.
At least, I've thought about creating such a device / service for about two years now (if I only had the $). And if I were Steve ... that's what I would do.
Everyone in the world -- including the professional analysts -- seem to be looking at this from a traditionalist perspective, and missing the bigger picture. It's driving me up a wall that no one else is seeing what I am seeing.
You think you're the only one who thought all those things. Besides the iPhone, or should I say the iPod Phone® will most definitely have to work as a regular phone as they would sell zero in Europe, if it didn't, for obvious reasons.
You think you're the only one who thought all those things. Besides the iPhone, or should I say the iPod Phone® will most definitely have to work as a regular phone as they would sell zero in Europe, if it didn't, for obvious reasons.
iPhone is about much more than everyone thinks ...
such a great post it needs to be read again and again.
BRAVO--BEST SAID OF ALL POSTS---you think different and i totally agree, too many are just thinking like typical analysts to the next quarter. SJ is positioning himself to today and the future. you are right the wifi, n-service, and cell--(broadband access will soon be and should be everywhere) will be competing with each other. SJ will leapfrog those, greedy companies that control the customer though archaic contracts and limited service to be much to many and be a total solution not just piece meal. we want cheap downloads not to spend 99cents on itunes but 5-7$ from verizon...(cost of song plus data airtime services--songs can't be put on any other device or stored, organized, or backed up) this will then reduce the illegal downloads. and that is what the industry is trying to fight tooth and nail. if anyone can save the industry they will look to SJ, they want a service to truly grow like itunes to preserve the industry and fight illegal downloads
In short, it is a plug in for the iPod that displays caller ID from a Bluetooth mobile phone. Maybe the iPhone is going to be something like that. iPod already has address book functionality. Imagine this: You are listening to iPod and want to make a call. On the iPod screen, you select the person whom you wish to call. iPod automatically stops the music you are playing and via bluetooth dials the number and allows you speak and hear through the iPhone headset. Not as elegant as a single unit, but perhaps more doable as bluetooth is so standard on so many phone lines.
$ 200.- for an iPod, Phone, PDA is too cheap. It doesn't sound like Apple. They could charge $ 200.- for any of these things on its own.
But if we assume that we are talking about one hardware transforming into the different tools via software, how would it look like you pay $ 200.- for the hardware and one function activated. When you want another function, like the phone or the pda you have to pay another 200 bucks and receive an activation code.
(hmmm selling one product under 7 different names for x different prices does sound familiar?)
Comments
Why is it that on patent applications the drawings are always rubbish.
because the patents have to be INSANELY generic, so that you can protect the idea better behind the design. if they get too specific in the drawings, then someone can create a product with the same functionality, but different form factor, and not have anything to worry about.
note: i am not a legal counsel, and my ramblings should be taken simply as that... ramblings.
Sorry, but the hell is up with new members using massive font sizes randomly? It's starting to look like a MS Word document in here. No taste. :P
Its all about wanting to be heard.
Everyone reads the big fonts.
This is why some people talk loudly and some don't.
Those who are paying attention hear you regardless.
IMHO.
Its all about wanting to be heard.
Everyone reads the big fonts.
This is why some people talk loudly and some don't.
Those who are paying attention hear you regardless.
IMHO.
So I suppose the fact that people read it is all that matters? The fact that most dismiss it, doesn't? Or the fact that most people dump on it, doesn't either?
Well, I guess some people might be sitting at home smug that even if their original post was stupid, because of it, they generated a lot of posting in return. Even if most of it is criticism.
I'm not sure I really want an all-in -one unit that does all that is listed in the patent.
I don't think that matters. It isn't as if the markets for separate and integrated devices are mutually exclusive. There are many that want integrated devices, many that don't and many that would choose from one or the other based on a particular need and what's available that fits that need. For example, a camera in a phone doesn't preclude carrying a separate, better camera. The camera in the phone is so small that it doesn't hurt the phone's size much. The same goes for audio devices, a couple thin flash chips doesn't hurt phone's size, they probably have to have at least one anyway. Any user can still opt for an external player if they like.
I doubt that any Apple phone will house a mechanical hard drive. I don't think many would put up with such a large phone that would result.
this may be old news but I just noticed that if you google up "iphone" one of the first links listed is that of "http://www.apple.com/itunes/mobile/"...
That has been there for a while I believe... it was used for the RAZR when it first came out (Im sure someone will correct me if I am wrong.
The iPhone device is not about hardware OR software; not in the long term. It is about positioning Apple to become the dominant player in communications.
Steve is looking ahead to a future where wireless networks will blanket all major metropolitan areas.
The iPhone may or may not launch with a traditional cellular capability. But it will be designed for the long-term integration of a wireless VoIP-type capability as a primary "mode". It will be designed to primarily be a wireless data communications device that can function over any wireless network, and to create a completely integrated mobile data lifestyle.
Why have a cell phone, home phone, etc when you can just have an iPhone which can switch seamlessly between cellular service -- which costs you $ -- and VoIP service in your home, about in your car in a wireless coverage zone, etc? VoIP based cellular service will be cheaper and tied directly to your wireless network subscription ... and most attractively for Apple, they can become the DOMINANT services provider, just like they have for music and other digital media.
In fact, look for Apple to introduce iPhone, and then leverage its existing strength in digital media to make iPhone the dominant hardware platform. Then look for them to launch a new VoIP-type service (possibly integrated with .Mac, but this is so huge they might set up a new thing entirely) centered around Apple hardware products, online media services, and iPhone. Finally, Steve will bring full integration of all data needs into the equation, using iPhone as a leverage device to further boost Mac system sales and market share.
Upon initial introduction of any 802.11 wireless VoIP/data capability, Apple will initially target users to use iPhone in their homes, over their existing wireless 802.11 networks. In the long term, as 802.11 begins to blanket everywhere, iPhone and the Apple VoIP-type service will begin to replace the existing cellular services providers in cities.
This is why Steve is so excited about iPhone that he is chatting about it amongst friends.
His plan is not to become a cellular services provider. His plan is to fundamentally transform and then take over the entire telecommunications business. He understands that iPhone will be 10 times as big of a breakthrough revolutionary product than iPod, and much more central to people's lives.
At least, I've thought about creating such a device / service for about two years now (if I only had the $). And if I were Steve ... that's what I would do.
Time to start beating some noob ass.
What's a noob?
Everyone in the world -- including the professional analysts -- seem to be looking at this from a traditionalist perspective, and missing the bigger picture. It's driving me up a wall that no one else is seeing what I am seeing.
You think you're the only one who thought all those things. Besides the iPhone, or should I say the iPod Phone® will most definitely have to work as a regular phone as they would sell zero in Europe, if it didn't, for obvious reasons.
What's a noob?
Noob, besides if you have to ask, then you must be
p.s. It's a friendly insult.
You think you're the only one who thought all those things. Besides the iPhone, or should I say the iPod Phone® will most definitely have to work as a regular phone as they would sell zero in Europe, if it didn't, for obvious reasons.
sorry but they can't use iPhone
such a great post it needs to be read again and again.
BRAVO--BEST SAID OF ALL POSTS---you think different and i totally agree, too many are just thinking like typical analysts to the next quarter. SJ is positioning himself to today and the future. you are right the wifi, n-service, and cell--(broadband access will soon be and should be everywhere) will be competing with each other. SJ will leapfrog those, greedy companies that control the customer though archaic contracts and limited service to be much to many and be a total solution not just piece meal. we want cheap downloads not to spend 99cents on itunes but 5-7$ from verizon...(cost of song plus data airtime services--songs can't be put on any other device or stored, organized, or backed up) this will then reduce the illegal downloads. and that is what the industry is trying to fight tooth and nail. if anyone can save the industry they will look to SJ, they want a service to truly grow like itunes to preserve the industry and fight illegal downloads
In short, it is a plug in for the iPod that displays caller ID from a Bluetooth mobile phone. Maybe the iPhone is going to be something like that. iPod already has address book functionality. Imagine this: You are listening to iPod and want to make a call. On the iPod screen, you select the person whom you wish to call. iPod automatically stops the music you are playing and via bluetooth dials the number and allows you speak and hear through the iPhone headset. Not as elegant as a single unit, but perhaps more doable as bluetooth is so standard on so many phone lines.
sorry but they can't use iPhone
Sorry? I'm the one who pointed it out? That's why I said iPod Phone®, and not iPhone
Anyway I meant the trademark iPhone was taken, not the URL.
Well that may be taken, but try iphone.org and iphone.net
They own iPhone.org, but not .net
Sorry? I'm the one who pointed it out? That's why I said iPod Phone®, and not iPhone
Anyway I meant the trademark iPhone was taken, not the URL.
oops... my bad.
Apple's iPhone will be a phone.
Apple's iPod will remain an iPod.
If Apple releases another device it will be a best of breed for a specific type of audience.
It won't be an all-in-one.
For security reasons you won't see an portable device that is the power of multiple devices in one.
Apple's iPhone will be a phone.
Apple's iPod will remain an iPod.
If Apple releases another device it will be a best of breed for a specific type of audience.
It won't be an all-in-one.
Do you need a saw for the limb you're on?
But if we assume that we are talking about one hardware transforming into the different tools via software, how would it look like you pay $ 200.- for the hardware and one function activated. When you want another function, like the phone or the pda you have to pay another 200 bucks and receive an activation code.
(hmmm selling one product under 7 different names for x different prices does sound familiar?)