Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Iphone Apple

Next iPhone — Front-Facing Camera, A4 Processor 327

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the yes-have-some dept.
As a quarter million pre-orderers wait for their iPad on Saturday, the millions of iPhone users can start speculating in earnest about the next gen iPhone. The rumors start by saying "It will be dubbed the 'iPhone HD' and will include a double resolution display, a front facing camera, multitasking support, and the blazing A4 processor."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Next iPhone — Front-Facing Camera, A4 Processor

Comments Filter:
  • by fulgan (116418) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:03AM (#31669868)

    ...because ?

    • by BarryJacobsen (526926) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:04AM (#31669912) Homepage

      And this is different from the 10000 other rumors...because ?

      Cause it's rumors that are occurring less than a week before the iPad - DUH!

    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:05AM (#31669920)

      Don't worry, the other 10000 rumors will all get their own Slashdot articles too.

  • But will it include minor expectations like a choice in carriers, or a bloody Flash plugin? Fix those before you add gadgets.

    • Hopefully Not (Score:5, Insightful)

      by RobotRunAmok (595286) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:10AM (#31669990)

      The iPhone's refusal to adopt Flash, coupled with its huge popularity, is among the greatest forces driving development away from Flash and towards alternate platforms. This is a good thing.

      • Re:Hopefully Not (Score:5, Insightful)

        by MobyDisk (75490) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:21AM (#31670148) Homepage

        This is a good thing.

        Since you've been modded to "Interesting" I think it is fair to ask "Why?"

        • Re:Hopefully Not (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Abcd1234 (188840) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:27AM (#31670276) Homepage

          The general view is that flash is a relatively closed format (yeah, it's an open spec, but let's face it, no one else has a player comparable to Adobe's implementation), based on a patented codec, wrapped up with a rather annoying DRM layer.

          Personally, my view is that flash is simply annoying... it's slow, clunky, sucks up CPU time, interacts poorly with the mouse and keyboard, is only barely cross-platform (let's face it, Linux gets the short end of the Flash stick) and is generally less elegant than an integrated browser solution. Well, at least for video (I never play flash games, so if it sticks around in that niche, hey, so be it).

          • Flash on Linux (Score:5, Interesting)

            by Enderandrew (866215) <enderandrew@noSPam.gmail.com> on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @11:27AM (#31671482) Homepage Journal

            I always hear that Linux gets the short-end of the Flash stick.

            Flash is buggy and unstable on all platforms. Since I run nightly builds of Firefox on Windows with out-of-process plugins, I haven't had one single Firefox crash. However, I've seen Flash crash left and right. Apple's crash reports show Flash is the number one cause of application crashes on their platform.

            Linux support used to be terrible. The Linux player was way behind, and Adobe didn't seem to care to update it.

            Today Linux is the only platform you can get an official 64-bit version of Flash. One can argue that Adobe has treated Linux better than the other platforms by giving them a 64-bit Flash before anyone else.

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by Abcd1234 (188840)

              Today Linux is the only platform you can get an official 64-bit version of Flash.

              Yup, and I have it installed. But it still isn't that great, and for video, inferior to an in-browser solution, IMHO. Heck, AFAIK, it still doesn't use hardware acceleration for video playback ('course, that may no longer be true now, I haven't checked recently).

          • Re:Hopefully Not (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Skuld-Chan (302449) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @11:42AM (#31671824)

            So its ok that Apple close everything down and make it so that you have to have a signed app (drm) to run anything on their phone, but not ok that flash is a closed format?

            Also you say "a patented codec" you know Flash supports about 6 different video codecs and 6 different audio formats right?

            On CPU time - the only reason it sucks cpu time on the Mac is because Apple doesn't publically document hardware acceleration for video players - essentially to do video on the Mac you have to use their slow Quicktime libs. In fact the only apps that use these secret api's are made by Apple (remember how Microsoft got a lot of flak over them being the only ones using secret tools/api's on Office to give them a competitive edge?). On my windows machine app - run of the mill Flash apps never seem to approach 10% cpu overhead in a worse case scenario. I have a 933 MHz Celeron based umpc that runs Windows XP and plays all flash apps (including hulu) just fine.

            The one study that was done on the Nexus One showed that playing video on Flash 10 used about 6% of the battery resources overall.

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by Abcd1234 (188840)

              So its ok that Apple close everything down and make it so that you have to have a signed app (drm) to run anything on their phone, but not ok that flash is a closed format?

              Aww, apparently my other comment offended a moderator. Presumably they don't know what strawmen are. Here, let me explain: I never made any value judgment regarding the iPhone, you just made that part up. That's the strawman.

              In fact, I couldn't care less how open or closed their platform is (and, TBH, if people really cared, they'd vo

        • by am 2k (217885)

          For developing in Flash, you need a specific app that costs $700 and only runs on Windows and Mac OS X. For developing in HTML5/Javascript, you need a text editor and a web browser.

          • Re:Hopefully Not (Score:5, Informative)

            by diskofish (1037768) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:39AM (#31670484)
            Wrong. Why do people here always pull shit out of their asses? You can download the Flex SDK and compiler for free from Adobe, and if you like, you can buy the IDE from Adobe for about $250.
            • by sopssa (1498795) *

              And even more so, theres also freeware Flash IDE's. Sure they're not as good as Adobe's, but it's still better than what easy IDE's there are for HTML5 Canvas (0 to be exact)

          • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

            by Abcd1234 (188840)

            For developing in Flash, you need a specific app that costs $700 and only runs on Windows and Mac OS X. For developing in HTML5/Javascript, you need a text editor and a web browser.

            And a few stress balls, and eventually a toupee after you're done tearing all your hair out...

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Vectormatic (1759674)

          just to add what other responses have left out: Flash also poses a significant security problem. These days most exploits target either the browser directly, or flash/pdf.

          As others have said, Adobe wouldnt be able to code themselves out of a wet paper bag, yet their software runs on 99.9% of internet connected computers, which poses a threat in terms of security.

          Not to mention the fact that flash adds are off course, the devil

          • by delinear (991444)
            If it's all about security, I wonder why they don't ban flash on safari for desktops? I assumed it was because flash is a major resource hog and it chokes the processors in phones.
      • Re:Hopefully Not (Score:4, Insightful)

        by dintech (998802) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:27AM (#31670270)

        I wish they could do something about the battery life though.

        • by delinear (991444) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @11:01AM (#31670916)

          I wish they could do something about the battery life though.

          They are, a faster processor, higher resolution and second camera should do something about battery life. Of course, it won't be something positive, but you can't have everything :)

        • Re:Hopefully Not (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Ryvar (122400) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @02:07PM (#31674544) Homepage

          iPhone battery life is, I've found, *entirely* dependent upon your location.

          Placing an average of 10 5-15 minute calls a day, my iPhone 3G which is coming up on 2 years old lasts 2.5-3 days in the Boston metro area.

          Back when it was 6 months old, placing 5 15-20 minute calls in the heart of San Francisco plus a little Google maps had the battery go from a full charge to completely drained in 6 hours. Similar results in the 7-8 hour range occurred on my next two visits.

          Contrast to the Sprint Mogul, which consistently had a 36-hour battery life no matter where I was.

          Presumably number of towers, number of competing phones, ambient radio noise and building/terrain geometry, etc. are the primary factors. Either way, my point is that this is a very relative thing: the iPhone is simultaneously the best and worst smartphone I've ever had in terms of battery life, depending on which city I'm in.

          --Ryv

      • Re:Hopefully Not (Score:5, Interesting)

        by DJRumpy (1345787) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:27AM (#31670274)

        Here here. There is no need for Flash on a touch phone for starters (it just doesn't work), it kills the battery on pretty much any non-ac powered device, and HTML 5 looks far more promising to me.

        As to the rumored phone features, I'm 'meh' about the higher resolution (pixel density is already good for that size screen) although it would make converting DVD's a bit easier as I wouldn't have to resize from the stock resolutions. The front facing camera will make self portraits a bit easier. I don't have any plans to utilize video chat. I never use it on my PC's, and I doubt I would ever use it on a phone.

        Most of these selling points just seem like must haves just because someone thought they sounded like a good idea and not because they really add a 'must have' feature. I dont' know how much real world value they will bring but I'll reserve judgement until I see one. I also don't use any apps that require multi-tasking outside of the core apps, although I suppose listening to streaming radio might be a nice change from my own tunes at the gym. I think the only multi-tasking I would find handy is answering a text message without having to exit what I'm currently in. Happens at the gym fairly often. Minor inconvenience.

        I'm also satisfied with the speed on the 3GS, so I don't know what the A4 will bring to the table. Possibly to better handle video chat? I suppose the only item of interest for me are the rumors of 4G support, and hopefully 'N' wireless.

      • What alternatives? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Comboman (895500)

        The iPhone's refusal to adopt Flash ... is among the greatest forces driving development away from Flash and towards alternate platforms.

        That's a bit of stretch, especially since the iPhone currently doesn't support any of the alternatives to Flash either (Silverlight, Java, HTML5).

    • by qoncept (599709)
      http://gear.ign.com/articles/106/1065534p1.html [ign.com]

      I don't think Apple devices will ever support flash.
    • or a bloody Flash plugin

      Adobe can't code their way out of a wet paper bag unless it's x86 Windows. So honest to $deity I hope not.

      • by sopssa (1498795) *

        Did you forget that Photoshop is foremost a Mac product?

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by drinkypoo (153816)

        Adobe can't code their way out of a wet paper bag unless it's x86 Windows. So honest to $deity I hope not.

        What? Adobe can't code on Windows, either. There was a time when they could do it on the Mac, but that ended about the time System 7 came out.

        If you look at what flash does, and compare it to some other similar system, you'll find it doesn't do much and it's horribly inefficient at what it does. There are loads of game engines which have been melded with a scripting engine which do the same kind of stuff at much higher levels of performance, probably mostly because they're not reinventing wheels. They're us

    • But will it include minor expectations like a choice in carriers, or a bloody Flash plugin? Fix those before you add gadgets.

      I've seen rumors [mobilecrunch.com] that a Verizon iPhone is on the way...

      But, as far as Flash goes, I'd rather they didn't support it.

      Sure, Flash has its place... But it's been horribly abused and overused for years. Platforms like the iPhone, and the advent of HTML5, have the opportunity to push Flash back where it belongs. I'd love to see that happen.

    • by Yvan256 (722131)

      Flash needs to die, and Apple is pushing web standards as the alternative (as opposed to Microsoft who would also like to see Flash die but only to replace it with Silverlight).

      No Flash on extremely popular devices is a good thin. It forces people to stop using Flash where there's no reason to use it, such as navigation and video.

      • by jez9999 (618189)

        And makes it a royal pain in the ass for people when there is a reason to use it, like live streaming video.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Vectormatic (1759674)

        No Flash on extremely popular devices is a good thin. It forces people to stop using Flash where there's no reason to use it, such as navigation and video.

        you dont even need an iphone type device for that. A year and a half back i worked on a webshop, and the program manager had me make a jpg/javascript fall back for the flash menu because google analytics showed that 1% of the visitors didnt have flash. When the main goal of your website is getting people in, and getting them to spend money, management will have programmers bending over backwards to support even IE 5.0 if they think they will make an extra buck.

        Granted, the only reason the navigation on that

    • by teg (97890)

      But will it include minor expectations like a choice in carriers,

      It does have a choice in carriers outside the US. The US is special, with much more carrier lock-in - a big reason being that the carriers use different standards. So I wouldn't be surprised if the ability to choose Verizon is far off - the mobile phone market just doesn't work as well in the US as elsewhere.

  • by actionbastard (1206160) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:04AM (#31669888)
    For the iPhone 3GAss. [gizmodo.com]
  • .... how Apple always manages to thrive upon rumors instead of upon "classical" ads. You may call such rumors "hypes", and they prolly are. Still, they do constitute remarkable publicity feats.
    • But they *do* have classical ads. My in-laws won't stop talking about them. (Yes, I have one, but please. I don't want to talk about commercials.)
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Ukab the Great (87152)

      Ads cost millions of dollars. Rumors cost nothing.

  • More speculating? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Bicx (1042846) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:06AM (#31669936)
    Is Apple product speculation really that interesting to people? Maybe it's fun to have that initial thought on what emerging tech could be, but Apple speculation quickly escalates into a never-ending stream of annoyance that builds expectations up to an unachievable level.
    • by jo_ham (604554) <joham999&gmail,com> on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @11:02AM (#31670950)

      You don't understand - this is slashdot. The rules work like this:

      1. Dredge up some random rumour site from the depths of the internet with possible Apple product info. This is usually wild speculation and based on the Mountain-Dew-fueled ramblings of an Apple fan.

      2. Bash this "finished product" on slashdot because it doesn't do x, y or z, or because it doesn't run Linux and use totally patent free technology.

      3. Complain that Apple is getting free publicity and that they are mentioned too much.

      4. Bring up comparisons to Apple in totally unrelated stories. Go to step 3 several times.

      5. Apple announces product.

      6. Complain that product is nothing like the rumour sites *guaranteed* it would be.

      7. Complain that it's locked down (again) and that anyone who buys one for any reason is a clueless sheep.

      8. Claim that the product is "proof" that Apple will soon fall.

      9. Wait for netcraft to confirm it.

      10. Assuming non-confirmation after two quarters of continued profitability for Apple, and large sales numbers of the "doomed" product, go to step 1.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Multi-tasking is a bad idea. Most users are not computer professionals.

    • by sopssa (1498795) *

      Multi-tasking is a bad idea. Most users are not computer professionals.

      Yeah, because multi-tasking in Windows definitely requires you to be computer professional. Everyone I know, also girls, are also perfectly capable of multitasking on phone.

      • by pushing-robot (1037830) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:45AM (#31670598)

        Ever use a Windows Mobile device? Background tasks on mobile hardware should be avoided whenever possible. Not because it's hard to multi-task, mind you—it's just hard to enjoy a smartphone when you have to constantly hunt for random process that are killing your battery life and/or slowing your phone to a crawl.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by delinear (991444)
          Well then they should fix that in the UI - that's meant to be their speciality after all. It can't be that difficult to find some way to alert people when multiple programs might be slowing down the system and give the option to easily locate and close some of them?
  • by dazedNconfuzed (154242) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:12AM (#31670012)

    If there's one thing history teaches about rumors regarding upcoming Apple products, it's that nobody talking knows anything. If anyone gets any Apple-product prediction right it's because enough monkeys pounding on typewriters will eventually write Shakespeare.

    Remember how the iPad was supposed to have a front-facing camera, an awesome chess game, full 1080p HD video, solar charging, biometric security, etc. - and wasn't going to just be a fat iPod Touch? Yeah.

    Sure the next iPhone will be an improvement. Duh. Anything more than that is pure rampant rabid speculation.

    • by Altus (1034)

      Some of the rumors might be informed, its not like apple is perfect at stopping leaks.

      good luck figuring out which ones are real leaks and which are just speculation though.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Yvan256 (722131)

      If anyone gets any Apple-product prediction right it's because enough monkeys pounding on typewriters will eventually write Shakespeare.

      If someone could finally give the monkeys modern computers with word processors, the error and typo rate would go down and they could write Shakespeare a lot faster.

    • by L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:29AM (#31670324)

      Sure the next iPhone will be an improvement.

      It will run Android.

      Zzzzzzing!

    • Depends on the source of the rumor. Some sites got the iPad right when they predicted a large iPod Touch with 3G capabilities. But generally the rule is to wait til Apple makes an announcement.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by delinear (991444)

        Depends on the source of the rumor. Some sites got the iPad right when they predicted a large iPod Touch with 3G capabilities. But generally the rule is to wait til Apple makes an announcement.

        Well in that case the source of the rumour doesn't really matter, since we have no way of verifying it before the fact. The fact that so many rumours are circulating means a ton of sites will get it right, even though their sources were probably non-existent and they were just guessing. Hell, I guessed the iPad would be a big iPod Touch with 3G, I certainly don't have any insider sources.

  • Back just before the iPhone launch. Unfortunately my friend in 'the city' informed me that the analysts at his place didn't think it would take off and I didn't invest.

    Dumbass!

    I hope they were fired.

    The way things are going the holy steve could wipe his butt on each iPad and still they'd sell like holy relics and the stock would rocket.

  • by Computer_kid (996105) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:14AM (#31670034)
    I present to you, the iPad Nano!
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Vectormatic (1759674)

      i bought an ipod touch the week after the big ipad let-down ($500 is ok, but what i want is a mac-book tablet, not a big ipod), and i seriously considered using apple's free engraving service to have 'iPad nano' engraved on it

      didn't do it though, i just would have felt stupid anyway, with all those maxiPad jokes..

  • Source Article (Score:5, Insightful)

    by necro81 (917438) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:17AM (#31670080) Journal
    Good Grief. I have a first-gen iPhone, and will consider upgrading when the next version comes out. So you can expect that I'm excited about the possible specs on. But, really, the linked article is a ridiculous i-gasm. If you are going to report this stuff, stick to the original sources, rather than linking to second-hand articles that lace their copy with unabashed fanboy-ism. If you want color commentary along with your tech news, check out the relevant post [engadget.com] on Engadget.

    What actually kicked off this latest wave of speculation was an an article [wsj.com] from the Wall Street Journal, stating that Apple is developing a CDMA version of the iphone for Verizon. The WSJ is a fairly reputable source that wouldn't print unless they had some solid evidence, so this should be interpreted as a bit more than a typical rumor.
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Algan (20532)

      The WSJ is a fairly reputable source ...

      The WSJ USED to be a fairly reputable source. Then Murdoch bought it.

  • is there some reason why a camera cannot be flexible to face whatever direction the user wants?

    A rotating camera inside a transparent sphere or maybe a system of mirrors and a software switch between directions?

    Not that I care about an iphone or a camera on a mobile, it's just a strange 'improvement'.

    • by Marcika (1003625) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:29AM (#31670316)

      is there some reason why a camera cannot be flexible to face whatever direction the user wants?

      Moving parts, hinges, even rotating mirrors, are failure-prone and take a lot of space. Most phone with front-facing cameras use two smaller lenses instead and leave out any moving parts -- my 4-year-old Sony Ericsson K610 has a VGA front camera for videoconferencing and a 2MP rear-facing camera for proper pictures. I am pretty sure that the iPhone will use the same concept.

    • by Nerdfest (867930)
      It's cheaper and easier to have a lower resolution front-facing camera as it removes the need for moving, easily breakable parts. Other camera have had this for about 3 years, the technology (and precedence) is well established. The question is are they going to allow Skype to be used over 3G?
    • by Lumpy (12016)

      Sony did that, it's horribly delicate.

    • by vlm (69642)

      is there some reason why a camera cannot be flexible to face whatever direction the user wants?

      I had a camera flip phone in the mid 00s that mounted the cam on the "flip". So close the phone and the cam faces you, for self portraits, and open the phone and the cam faces outward, for taking pictures of other people. Camera "shutter" button on side, using "trigger finger".

      I found the whole concept of a cam phone useless, and the blurry fuzzy low res pix to be worthless, but it was a good design.

  • by fermion (181285) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:21AM (#31670152) Homepage Journal
    Perhaps it is because the phones are changing so much, but Apple does not seem to be keeping to their traditional 3 years of useful life policy. I had to replace my first gen iPhone because the 3.0 software, released only two years after the iPhone, ran like a dog. Unlike a general purpose computer, the new OS get pushed through the synch process so there is little hope of keeping it off.

    With the iPad and probably a new iPhone leveraging much more computing power, I can imagine an iPhone 4.0 software that will also make the current iPhones run like dogs, and I would not be surprised to see such an OS by the end of this year. This would not be so much of an issue but most of us sign two year contracts, but the OS seems to make hardware obsolete in 18 months. I sure wish that Apple would let us pay 50 dollars for to reduce the contract terms to one year. That is what I used to with phones.

  • Screen resolution (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Xest (935314) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:23AM (#31670188)

    If this is true then it's really no suprise, particularly regarding the screen resolution.

    Many pointed out the issue of having to cater to different screen sizes with Android and touted the iPhone as a superior platform for development because it's hardware is static.

    I've long said that it's not realistically going to stay that way, with the iPhone you already have differences between existing models that you must cater too in terms of performance and certain features. It's not suprising that resolution is now something you will also have to deal with, because the iPhone was already running at half the resolution of the likes of the Nexus One.

    Of course, you might say that Apple will automatically scale apps, which is an option, but that just means the apps wont be making any use of the higher resolution.

    It'll be interesting to see how Apple handles this, and with the iPad coming too, developers for Apple's platform are going to have to cater to differences just as with Android, and just as developers of desktop apps have always had to.

    Realistically it could only ever be a pipe dream to keep the hardware static, else the phone would simply get dated and no other platforms based on the technology (i.e. the iPad) could ever be released. If this is true it's really a vindication of the fact that if you want your platform to advance, and stay relevant, there's no hiding behind the supposed advantage of having a static hardware platform for the sake of easier development. Developers are going to have to work and deal with differences over time regardless whether they're developing for Windows, Android or the iPhone.

    Do any iPhone developers here know whether this means existing applications might have to be updated to support different resolutions? It'll be a massive job if so, so I'm guessing by default the new iPhone will indeed just scale graphics or something to start with unless an application specifically handles differing resolutions?

  • Can I install my software without Apple's permission yet?

    Can I assign my songs directly as ringtones yet?

    Can I add my own audio and video codecs yet?

    Can I take my phone to another carrier without Apple trying to brick my phone with a firmware update yet?

    Can I multitask yet?

    Can I use Flash (and watch Hulu) yet?



    Yep, I think my n900 is still the phone for nerds. I have a philosophical issue with Apple telling me what i can and can't do with hardware I purchased, when there is no technical r
    • by Lumpy (12016) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:49AM (#31670690) Homepage

      and you N900 is also dog slow., herky jerky and has phone problems. I loved my N900, but I need a phone first and a pocket PC second. I had cell tower hand-off problems, Bluetooth connectivity with my car sucked (have to reboot N900 after EVERY call to make another call through the car's hands free bluetooth, Damn Ford and BMW and their non standard Bluetooth that works with all other phones INCLUDING older Nokias!) The interface get's slow at times making you wait, AND I experienced lockups at times.

      I had to have a phone that worked with my bluetooth and worked as a phone 100% of the time. the N900 is not useable for that. Sadly my friends iPhone did not have problems with using the car's bluetooth integration, and he does not have lockups or loss of cellphone reception in many places. Yes I checked... my kichen, N900 = no signal his iphone 2 bars. walk to living room 5 bars, N900 still no signal for 30-60 seconds..... OH there it is! I get 3 bars! WOOOO!

      I'm seriously thinking of selling my N900 on ebay and getting an iPhone or a Nexus 1

    • by ducomputergeek (595742) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @11:12AM (#31671154)

      Ah, but one point you failed to realize: the iPhone is not nor ever was for nerds & geeks. It was for everyone else. And there are a lot more everyone elses. And I for one consider lack of flash to be a feature, not a bug. And as someone who worked in video production in the earlier part of the last decade, H.264 won and for very good reasons. Primarily, it's the best Codec available. We now have a standard to which all devices/software should be writing & playing. The last thing I want to see is a return to Codec Hell.

      Regardless I have heard from several people inside ATT that they are loosing exclusively and we're likely to see a CDMA iPhone for Verizon or Sprint later this year. Although if the wireless carriers in the US begin deploying 4G technology (which is supposed to be the same for everyone), then maybe we'll finally see a phone that will work on all carriers.

  • Will it have little kittens and ponies too?! Oh yeah, ponies! I want ponies! Black ones and polka-dotted ones, and pink ones too!
  • Given that they've barely changed the hardware in the last couple of iterations, I see no reason to suspect that they'll do anything different.

    Before the 3GS came out, everyone went mad imagining what kind of new stuff it had and ended up being disappointed. Yet, if they'd looked at past performance, they should have realised they were being hopelessly optimistic.

    My prediction is that there will obviously be new software but the hardware will remain largely unchanged with the exception being that they'll ch

    • by Tim C (15259)

      The problem with that theory is that they *must* update the hardware eventually, or lose out to the competition.

  • Resolution (Score:4, Interesting)

    by sonicmerlin (1505111) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @11:09AM (#31671092)

    I'm impressed by its resolution, which is purported to be 960 x 640, according to engadget: http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/29/wsj-apple-developing-new-iphone-plus-another-for-verizon/ [engadget.com]

    That's a step-up from the rest of the pack, including the "super-phone" EVO 4G. I'm wondering if this also means a step-up in overall screen size.

    Regardless of where you fall in the iPhone fan/hate camp, you have to admit competition breeds excellence.

    Now if only we could do something about the locked-in phones, 2 year contracts, "subsidized" loan plans, and uncompetitive wireless market in the US.

  • My prediction (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jonwil (467024) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @11:38AM (#31671728)

    Better 3G chip to go with all the carriers that have rolled out various kinds of HSDPA
    Same CPU as the iPad (or more likely a version that cuts back the speed and power consumption to account for the smaller battery on the iPhone)
    No multitasking (regardless of battery life concerns, Apple would need to "ruin" its perfect UI with some kind of task switcher feature)
    No front facing camera (video calling has not taken off in the way phone carriers would like, especially in the US. AFAIK its almost non-existent on AT&T)
    Rewritten bootloaders and security to make jailbreaking and unlocking harder
    I suspect 802.11n will appear IF apple can find a low power chip that doesn't require devoting too much of the internal space of the iPhone to the antenna.

    I predict that there will still be no support for:
    Loading apps without going through the app store
    Fast 2D drawing APIs (CoreSurface or whatever it is) being able to be used in official apps
    External keyboards of any kind
    Any peripheral where Apple doesn't get a cut from every unit sold.
    Any kind of ability for apps to share data files with each other
    Any kind of ability to load arbitrary files onto an iPhone (i.e. a generic "documents" folder)

    I also predict that there will continue to be many reasons Apple will reject your app submission, all of which exist as official policy at Apple (and are known to the app store reviewers) and none of which Apple will ever disclose to developers. One of these "unwritten rules" is likely "no apps that mean less revenue for Apple carrier partners such as AT&T"

  • Packing (Score:3, Insightful)

    by NicknamesAreStupid (1040118) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @11:55AM (#31672110)
    I heard that it will have a 12 inch screen that rolls up into a 3" diameter so you can stick it in your pants. Nerds finally get a toy that impresses the ladies. Did I mention that when the phone is set to vibrate . . .
  • by mcguyver (589810) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @01:35PM (#31674002) Homepage
    Note to sensationalist Slashdot mods. This is a rumor, that's significant info, note that in the title. Please say that /. hasn't degraded to the point of disguising apple rumors as legit stories on the homepage. Feel free to mod this down but some long time /. readers have got to be thinking the same thing.

There are running jobs. Why don't you go chase them?

Working...