iPhone Faces Uncertain Market 869
48 hours have passed since Steve Jobs's MacWorld keynote and the reality distortion field is beginning to wear off. Lists of the drawbacks of the announced iPhone are sprouting all over the Net (and there is the occasional defense by true believers). Now narramissic writes, "The iPhone may be poised to take over the high-end cell phone market, but is it a market worth taking? Not if an InStat survey from July is any indication: Of 1,800 consumers surveyed, just 21 had spent more than $400 for a cell phone. Prices for the iPhone, admittedly more of a handheld computer than a cell phone, start at $499 for the 4G-byte version with a required two-year contract with Cingular. So, is Apple pricing it right? Analysts quoted in this article seem to think Apple's going to have a hard time getting the 1% of market share that Jobs called for."
Is it possible... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is it possible... (Score:5, Insightful)
If Apple can generate the buzz to make this into a fad item like the iPod, they could sell millions to young people and damn the cost. However, if it ends up being grouped in as just a superior Smart Phone, you aren't going to get anyone but the gadget freaks to buy one at that price.
Re:Is it possible... (Score:4, Insightful)
This is a new take on an old market. Give it time. I bet come October we'll all be singing a different tune...
Re:Is it possible... (Score:5, Insightful)
And it went on to be their bestseller until replaced by the Nano.
Shows what I know.
I think the market may expand here. The high-end cellphone market is so small because most of the devices are so effin' hard to use for non-geeks. My wife's eyes glaze over when I try to explain to her how to use Google Maps on my 7100t. She may (note: MAY) find the interface on the iPhone easier.
Re:Is it possible... (Score:4, Insightful)
My point? Lots of other college students with disposable income will be early adopters too. Techies or not. IT IS FASHIONABLE (like the ipod). Same things with high school kids wanting a slick phone, maybe some business professionals/middle income 20 to 30 somethings. Apple has turned pretty gadgets into an "overpriced" fashion statement before. Moto did it with the Razr, and apple will probably do it with the iPhone.
Re:Is it possible... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, the iPod didn't become a big success until they released iTunes for Windows. It was popular, but limited to the Mac market. If you wanted to, there were 3rd party programs you could buy (at least 2 or 3 big ones) that would let you use a iPod with Windows.
But it was when "Hell froze over" and the other 98% of the computer using public could actually use the device easily that it really exploded. It could have easily done quite good at revision one, and the second revision was extremely good as well.
As
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Do I want one? oh hell yeah, I was planning on getting a new phone, and I may just hold out another 5-6 months to
Re:Is it possible... (Score:4, Insightful)
Excellent point. It wasn't until 2004 that Apple's profits really took off as a result of the success of the iPod. It was really Christmas 2003 and the release of the Mini in January 2004 that started that meteoric rise, and that's a good two years after the iPod debuted.
However, there are some fundamental differences between the iPod and the iPhone. Very few people had portable MP3 players in 2001. How many iPod owners have owned any other MP3 player besides an iPod? So to get them to buy an iPod, they just had to be convinced that the value it brought to them justified the price they paid for it. Between 2001-2003, Apple steadily improved the value (increasing capacity, reducing size, improving user interface, adding photos, etc.) while also bringing down the price (original iPod cost $400 for a 5GB version, by Christmas 2003 it was $300 for a 15 GB, and the Mini was only $250 in January 2004.)
Most people already own a cell phone. So people don't just have to be convinced that an iPhone is worth $X, but also that it is a better value vs. their current phone and a huge slew of competitor phones from Motorola, Nokia, Samsung, LG, etc. Jobs wants to claim that Apple is re-inventing cell phones because he does not want his iPhone compared to other phones. Sure it will have advantages over other phones in many areas, but it will also have disadvantages. And it's obviously a lot more expensive. These are much bigger obstacles than anything the iPod faced.
One last thing... A big part of why the iPod succeeded is that from 2001-2003, nobody really stepped up to compete with Apple. It really wasn't until last year that somebody (Microsoft) came up with a product (Zune) with a similar user experience as the iPod. It's really pretty amazing. I was fortunate enough to get an iPod in 2001, and I kept guessing that at some point somebody would come out with an MP3 player that did everything the iPod did, but cost $100-$150 less than an iPod. It never happened. It still hasn't happened. Apple can't expect the same kind of lack of competition for the iPhone.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why? Business users don't typically pay for their phones, the business buys them. If it's a good usable phone, I don't see why there won't be take up. There of course will be a lot of upwards pressure for take up, as it gains the business user a FREE iPOD!
The price is fine btw.. my windows smartphone not on a contract costs £600 (£1000), the Apple one se
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
No, I don't remember that.
"Once non-Slashdot people start seeing the likes of Paris Hilton and Shaq using the iPhone, it will gain traction."
Paris is too dumb to use a phone without a real keypad. Where would she have her swarovski crystals glued on?
The fact is that phones with entirely touchscreen-driven interfaces have failed in the market so far so the iPhone has history against it. There are plenty of phones in the iPhone pri
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Not to mention that they're completely unusable by blind people.
Re:Is it possible... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2082444,00.a s p [pcmag.com]
And no, I wouldn't consider PCMag to be a 'fanboi' site at all...
Some excerpts:
"For the most, it was an absolute revelation. Seeing the device in action is one thing--but actually using it is another. Each application is impressive in its own right, from photo-management software to the Safari Web browser, but it's the overall touch-screen interface that takes the breath away."
"The rest of
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Is it possible... (Score:5, Insightful)
The PS3 is having difficulty because, in a word, it sucks. It's more than a day late and a dollar short.
I'll give you a different take on the "Smart Phone" limitations. I, for one, haven't bought one because of the size, power requirements, and sheer onconvience of using and carrying one. Along comes Apple, and appears to make this simple, easy to use, intuitive, and, to top it off, good looking. Oh, and need we mention that you can also run your familiar interfaces on it provided you like Macs to begin with? No special "browser" needed. No new learning how to browse the web. A PDA you can actually use. My current LG phone's calendering option is so convulted to setup that I don't use it. The contact list is "locked", or they think it is, so I cannot manage it easily nor sync it with my computer. The iPhone does away with all of that. It will appeal to a large group of people that are carrying both a cell phone and an iPod, if you add PDA and/or pocket PC to that, you'll just add to the attraction.
Re:Is it possible... (Score:5, Insightful)
I have a Dell Axim. I have a Motorola RAZR. I have an iPod. I don't have a pocket to put all that in and I refuse to go with the Batman utility belt look.
Apple is offering one device that does all that for $500-$600. I can carry it in my pocket. It's flash-based, so I can run with it. It's a PDA with wifi and GSM which runs Cocoa apps. It's a cellphone. It's location aware and can tie Google Maps to my cell functions.
Lets see: $299 for a Dell Axim (520MHz model), $249 for an 8GB iPod, and $80 (after rebate and with 2-yr contract) for a RAZR. That comes to $628. $599 for all that in one device sounds great.
Now if only it included a Leatherman Supertool I'd be set.
...or is this an attempt to define a new category (Score:5, Insightful)
This thing is just a first stab, and it's being aimed at the high-end cellphone market, if only because that's a market that exists, and to communicate, you've got to have people to communicate with. But perhaps Apple's betting that, though it may make phone calls, the gadget of the future won't be though of as a phone.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree, but... I am not a marketroid. What the 'troids understand and I do not, is that normal people need to "get" what it is before they will pay for it. The iPod was clearly a music player, a well-established class of device, so an abstracted brand name works. The iPhone, on the other hand, may very well be an entirely new class of device, in which case "iFoo" is a terrible branding decision.
"What hell is an iFoo?"
"Well, it's a kind of super-phone."
"B
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So actually I think th
Apples and oranges (Score:3, Insightful)
They had to name the product something. But the fact is, you could remove all the phone-related features from this product and it would still be worth $499. It's a PDA and a musi
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Way smaller than the current equivalent smart-phones, giant screen, and 5 hours of battery life with all of th
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes. Have you used recent models of iPods? They work exactly like this phone, save for the touch-wheel instead of the screen interface. This just adds regular phone features on top of an iPod, but does it right.
For example, it drives me nuts that I still have to dial in to check my voice mail. We have perfectly good wireless networks for communicating traffic, why do we have to do this the old POTS way? Well, Apple corrected t
Re:Apples and oranges (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Apples and oranges (Score:5, Insightful)
Am I the only one that thinks Apple skipped shooting themselves in the foot and just shot themselves in the head with this one? The iPhone seems ripe with endless 3rd party app possibilities, it's counter-intuitive to not allow developers to create apps for it.
This isn't a iPod where it plays music and plays it well so there's no need for 3rd party apps, this is a convergence device that should have software that takes advantage of all it's functions. After all, what's the point of a fancy menu if you can't add anything to it?
Far as I know the iPhone will be the only $500+ cellphone that's doesn't have 3rd party apps. All the other ones I can recall are PocketPCs or Blackberries that allow 3rd party apps.
I think I speak for everyone when I say: Apple, get a clue, allow 3rd party apps. I'll admit it, I'm part of the 99% that has never bought a $400+ cellphone, but I have a PocketPC, cellphone and iPod and I was considering replacing all three, even my PSP and digital camera would likely get a lot less use depending on photo quality and 3rd party games. But hearing that there's no 3rd party apps is giving me serious reservations to the point that I'd have to say no, I will most likely not pay $500+ for a device knowing I'm locked into using only what few apps that are included.
Anyone else who considered buying a iPhone having second thoughts upon hearing there will be no 3rd party apps?
Re:Apples and oranges (Score:5, Insightful)
I simply can not believe any company would be this stupid in this day and age. It's like coming out with a game system but not allowing 3rd party developers to make games for it. What if the PSP or DS only ran games made by Sony or Nintendo? You'd have what, 5 titles each maybe? How many millions of dollars would they lose?
They're trying to corner the top 1% of gadget geeks, those select few willing to blow $500 on a glorified cellphone. Gadget geeks will not be happy using only the few apps that are included. Apple will be forced to sweeten the pot, and doing means millions of dollars of profit in licensing fees.
I only have this to say: if Apple doesn't allow 3rd party developers on their cellphone than I'm sure either Microsoft [usatoday.com] or Google [searchenginejournal.com] will.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You're not the only one that thinks Apple went straight for the head shot. In a bad way. I was just about spitting out my drink over how cool this thing is, until I read it's closed. So now I'm going back to my previous plan to get the HTC thing with the landscape-mode slide-out keyboard (eg Cingular 8125) when contract renewal time comes up, unless it turns out there's some simple hack that all
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Is it possible... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is it possible... (Score:4, Interesting)
It is like the original iPod: A good friend ran out and bought the 5GB 1st Gen iPod right when it was released. When the 10GB model was released he ran out and bought that one because he had a music collection much larger than the 5GB (and also much larger than 10GB...) Then, shortly after Apple shipped the 20GB model and he was kicking himself for not waiting - especially after I bought the 20GB model. Although, I am pretty happy with my timing because right after I bought mine they changed over to an iPod with the dock connector and I prefer the standard FireWire connector.
I'm just guessing, but I think there will probably be an improved iPhone that has 3G support and much larger strorage space sometime in 2008 if not sooner. I could see them adding GPS and coming out with an SDK for developers, etc. (I expect Apple to announce some kind of SDK for iPhone at WWDC - even if it just Dashcode 2.0.)
My advice is that unless you just have to have the iPhone as soon as possible, wait at least three months. Typically new Apple hardware has a few annoying glitches that show up in the field and are addressed in approximately that timespan. For example, the original iMac was revised a couple months after it shipped to have much more VRAM and as I recall the Rev B. iMac was much more stable than the Rev. A iMac. Another example is the MacBook Pro. I just bought a MacBook Pro a few days ago. So far, it is rock solid. And it doesn't run hot like the first ones did. Recently I found out that the ones like mine that have the Core 2 Duo also have 802.11n radios just waiting to be activated via software update. So, frankly I am thrilled with my timing on this purchase. Another friend (different guy) in my office bought one of the first MacBook Pro models and it had a lot of problems. He had to have the motherboard replaced and it runs really hot. Well, that's what you get with brand new hardware designs.
I think the same thing could be true with the iPhone. I may get one because I develop for the Mac and my company will probably buy me one to develop for - or maybe I'll get prototype hardware (one of our execs is at MacWorld trying to talk to Apple Developer Relations about letting us develop for iPhone). I have no idea what the policy will be for third party developers. From what I've heard, its a closed system, but third parties can contact Apple if they want to write for it. So, we'll see - I had prototype hardware for the Newton 2000 before it came out. But if for some reason this doen't happen and I have to shell out my own cash for an iPhone, I'll probably wait a couple of months and see what the reader reports on Macintouch say before I buy one.
Sorry, link here (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Is it possible... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Is it possible... (Score:5, Insightful)
Look at the iPod: Before that product, the market for $300 mp3 players was relatively non-existent.
The iPhone will probably do the same thing: Create its own market and then dominate it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Factor in that convenience/expense and the cost is competitive. Of course if you don't use an iPod, you have the current argument that it's a damn expensive phone. Of course, if you outfit your smart phone with 8 gig of ram (ignoring for the moment that you *can't*!) it's actually a pretty good deal compared to many smart phones.
The only reason I am hesitating
One more thing... (Score:5, Informative)
I'm just saying Apple isn't breaking ground on cell phone price points in this category.
Re:Is it possible... (Score:5, Insightful)
The OS is unresponsive, the email clients have a hard time connecting, and the various applications crash too much. The interface stinks. There are too many buttons and jog wheels and doo-dads. They're all just toys, and pretty much everyone I know spends more time trying to get theirs to do something than they spend time using it.
If someone would just make a cell phone with an e-mail client that wasn't completely frustrating, I might spend $500 on the phone and an extra $20 a month *just for that*. Yes, I've tried Blackberries, and I've even supported Blackberries. I can't stand them.
Also, you have to consider that people have shown a willingness to spend $300 for just an iPod. Let's say Apple made an iPod with a screen as big as the screen on the iPhone. Would people be willing to spend $300 on it? Yes. If you made a smartphone as slick as the iPhone without the iPod components, would people spend $200 on it? Certainly. So why are people saying that no one will pay $500 for the iPhone?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, honestly, what worries me most about the iPhone is the rumors that it will be closed to third party developers. I can tell you that I really like what I'm seeing as far as the e-mail and web browsing, but what I'd really like is to be able to do some remote administration. If I could get SSH, VPN, and a terminal services client on an iPhone, I would consider it a near-perfect device. The only thing to make it perfect would be if, in a pinch, I could use it to provide internet access for my laptop, b
Re:Is it possible... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is it possible... (Score:4, Interesting)
If this fact remains true, then while the interface is a little clunkier, there are any number of things that my Treo can do that the iPhone will never, ever be able to, and believe me, I sincerely hope that the Apple VP who made that saddening statement is either very stupid, or very misinformed.
Re:Is it possible... (Score:5, Insightful)
I was a big palm fan. I use my Tungsten T3 every day. I am also a mobile application developer (J2ME, Palm (not very strong on that one)). However, the PalmOS based Treos are doomed, especially in the face of the iphone which also threatens the Windows mobile ones. I think it's a bit hypocritical for hard core palm fans, like the parent post to blindly defend what is a wreck for many reasons.
Let's take apart this reply about how the treo does the vast majority of what the iphone does (and since 2003! that's hubris)
>> Your Treo has accelerometers and a proximity sensor?
> Not as powerful a one, but there's a reason it shuts down when dropped (and not broken, it just knows when to save itself from corruption)
The answer is that no, the Treo does not have an accelerometer. It does not have a proximity sensor. It does not have an ambient light sensor as the iphone does. Hence it does not switch to landscape mode when you tilt it (actually, it doesn't even have landscape mode as the screen is smaller and square). It does not turn off the screen automatically when it's close to your face when you're speaking. It also does not adjust its brightness based on the ambient light (apple is not the first to do this - my w810i does it too, but your treo doesn't).
Point goes to apple.
>> It has a Dock Connector?
> Yes. It's called a USB cable.
What the GP post probably meant is: Can you connect the vast number of accessories that Apple has enabled through the doc connector to the Treo? External speakers? FM transmitters? The Treo is a USB slave device, which means you can only use that USB port to connect it to a computer - you can't connect an accessory that way. The treo doesn't even ship with a cradle. The iphone does (apparently). And don't get me started on that Palm joke the Universal connector, which they abandoned after 3 models.
Point goes to apple.
>> It has a full web browser (not some shrunken down "baby browser")?
> Correct. [link to blazer]
No. Blazer is a baby browser. Can blazer run in the background while you do something else? Can it view PDFs? Can it run Ajax ("web 2.0") sites? The answer to all of these, as you well know, is no.
Safari can do all of these, however.
Point goes to apple.
>> It has a touchscreen interface?
> Yes, and has for years.
Well, sort of. Your treo digitiser can only detect one "click" with the stylus/finger. The iphone has "multitouch", which means it can detect multiple presses on the screen. And the GUI is *fully* touchscreen driven.
Point goes to apple.
>> It has a virtual keyboard so you don't have to press 7 four times to get an S?
> It has a full keyboard you can type on in your pocket. Have you even seen one? That's the dumbest comment of all these.
yup, you're right there. Point goes to Palm (though it's a really minor one)
>> It syncs with iTunes?
> Who wants that? It syncs like a hard-drive. 4gb SD card slides into computer. mp3's are copied, and then played.
Lots of people do! Have you noticed how popular the store is? In any case you can do that with the treo too, through missing sync (though not the protected stuff). So point goes to Palm.
>> How many people are going to post ignorant "My phone does all this" claims without thinking it through?
>> How many people are going to realize many phones have been doing the majority of this stuff for years....and the iPhone won't be about for a number of months?
So 2 points to palm, versus 4 to apple. But you forgot to mention the most vital stuff (and i'm referring to PalmOS based treos, not the winmob ones. But you seem to have a PalmOS one, since you mention blazer)
- A horrible cludge of an OS. Everyone knows it. You can't truly multitask (and don't even try the "zen of palm" defence). It crashes and reboots *very* frequently and easily. You can't run a nat
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The Creative Nomad did everything that the iPod did when it was released, yet the iPod was actually usable by normal people. Look where the Creative Nomad is today. FWIW, I'm a happy Treo 650 owner with PocketTunes and all the doodads, but it took me about 20 hours to get all of the applications installed and usable and I'm a techie. For the norma
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Set the wayback machine to 2001... (Score:5, Interesting)
Let's see:
Apple iPod Demand Iffy [com.com]
Pundits compliment, criticize iPod [macworld.com]
Favorite excerpts from that second one:
iPod + Phone (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not familiar with the specs of the iPhone, but it isn't as simple as "this is a really expensive phone."
Wireless, More Space Than Nomad... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wireless, More Space Than Nomad... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
With the iPhone, it is only Cingular customer, and even then only the customer planning to stay for another 2 years.
Ok you may say that iPod was for Mac user only in the beginning but I don't think Apple has the same karma appeal with its own customer than with Cingular contract user. In this case Apple must rely on Cingular karma and it is less flawless ( sorry for the 2 Cingular fanboys )
Re:Wireless, More Space Than Nomad... (Score:5, Insightful)
SO, I wouldn't base the past success of the iPod as an indicator of the future success of the iPhone.
Re:Wireless, More Space Than Nomad... (Score:5, Insightful)
I hereby predict the FUDsters (initiated by cell phone manufacturers frightened of what Apple unveiled on Tuesday) are wrong and that Apple will be highly successful with the iPhone.
Re:Wireless, More Space Than Nomad... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's true that it isn't quite the same situation as MP3 players, but there is a similarity in the relative suckiness of the product being sold. Before Apple entered the MP3 market, the players available were all terrible. The technology was ok, more or less, but the user experience of the devices was ridiculously awful. Likewise with the current cell-phone market. The technology is pretty well established and good enough, and everyone I know has a cell phone. But everyone I know *hates* their cell phone. The experience of using them is just terrible.
You say Apple has no expertise in the commodity business, but where they seem to excel is in entering a commodity market, selling high-end products that offer an excellent user experience, and making a killing from being the prestige brand in that otherwise commodity market.
Re:Wireless, More Space Than Nomad... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The original iPod was also quite expensive compared to everything else out in the market when it was introduced, but it offered a superior way to listen to music. It broke open the market and now eight year-olds are runni
Re:Wireless, More Space Than Nomad... (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course, the 10 years prior to that, they saw their desktop computer market share shrink to almost nothing. Not trying to be a troll, but "Past performance should not be used as an indicator of Future performance".
Not just a cell phone (Score:3, Insightful)
Not exactly.... Steve lied on stage (Score:3, Informative)
The OS isn't going to be "OS X for real." It's more like a pseudo-OS X and, like the iPod, it will not have a public API and open development.
Unlike the Pocket PC which has open API's for development by third party people (like you and me
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Will this ever stop? It runs OS X in the same sense that other phones run Linux - a heavily trimmed-down version of it. And it is not a Mac Mini. For one thing, all you will get on it is most-likely a tightly-controlled set of Apple-approved apps. That is, aside from the standard fare that comes with a smartphone (which in this case includes slimmed-down
Cingular Service plan will kill it (Score:5, Insightful)
So that $600 price tag is really closer to $3000.
If Apple is really smart, they've already locked Cingular to a reasonable cell plan. They might be able to capture the high-end market with the iPhone, but without cheaper plans, they will never get the majority of people.
Re:Cingular Service plan will kill it (Score:5, Insightful)
If Apple had been smart, they would have went to T-mobile (or Cingular) and worked with them to get a rate plan similar to the T-mobile branded Sidekick. $20.00/month for unlimited data and SMS with a phone plan or $29.99 without. You can't use the device as a modem though...
I refuse to pay the astronomical data plan rates that other providers offer. I especially won't go to Cingular after how I was treated during their switch from AT&T.
Re:Cingular Service plan will kill it (Score:4, Interesting)
I've heard stories of Cingular's bad service, but I go to a store in person and don't take any shit from them. I even had them unlock my old AT&T phone to work with a new cingular contract, though it did take a call to some sort of supervisor person.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
iPod story repeated (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm in the market for a cell phone (Score:4, Interesting)
I'll probably buy a cheap-o model and wait. Someone let me know when there's an unlocked model for $250.
Re:I'm in the market for a cell phone (Score:5, Insightful)
Well I am not going to make any analysis based on what people on
I think it's cool but ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Something as small as having a touch screen to dial your phone, and display everything, means that you're either going to have to carry around a stylus (which you will probably lose) which will scratch your screen, or your screen will have fingerprints; either way it means images/videos/text will be hard to read.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple is going for the stylus-free touch screen approach. The other problem with this is that unless touch screen tech has changed drastically in the last 6 mo., this will be unusable while weari
Not enough information (Score:5, Informative)
Anybody who talks about what is going to happen with the iPhone in certain terms at this point is an idiot.
No phones good enough (Score:3, Insightful)
This could simply mean that there were no phones good enough to justify the higher price tag. I mean, is there a phone with a few GB of memory, big touch screen and really good software? What kind of phone can you buy for $500 right now?
Success will come a little later (Score:5, Interesting)
The biggest problem with all smartphones today is that UI design is generally terrible. If Apple can get this right, and make a family of phones that react quickly and are fun to use, they will sell a lot of them.
Further, it seems to me, phone or not, that this is what the iPod will look like in 2 years time. The wheel is no longer needed, and this format makes video a pleasant reality.
So it's quite possible that the "phone" part of this product is less significant than the large-screen, no-button, Apple-inside format.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's because they're surveying the wrong people (Score:5, Insightful)
Cingular (Score:3, Interesting)
-b.
Kind of a short sighted view.... (Score:5, Insightful)
2. Apple Fanboys will buy this version because "17 50 7074||y ru|35 4nd w1|| pwn 7h3 m4rk37 dud3!"
3. Apple will release version 2.0 with way more storage (1.8" hard disk or SSD) for half the price. This will happen in about 18 months, But not actually ship for another 4 - 6 months after it is announced. (so as not to piss off Cingular)
4. Joe Sixpack will buy that version in droves. Fanboys who have version 1.0 rush to upgrade because "17 50 7074||y ru|35 4nd w1|| pwn 7h3 m4rk37 dud3!"
5. Profit!
Regular people don't buy smartphones (Score:5, Insightful)
Except for gadget geeks, probably 80% of the Blackberrys, Treos, etc are purchased by companies for employees or by business owners.
Apple is hoping to extend that market by taking a typical consumer/parent who is about to buy a $300 iPod anyway and convincing them spend another $200 for a phone that has unique internet capability. The reasoning behind this is that a person who is ready to by a $300 device is far more likely to spring for a $500 device.
The typical phone buyer considers the phone to be almost disposable. If you come into a store to buy a $50 RAZR after rebate, you're not going to get them to spring for $499. So Apple is taking advantage of the iPod buzz to upsell iPod consumers (the average iPod buyer has already owned 3) into iPhones.
This is sales 101. That's why half the people who show up to buy a Toyota Corolla drive away with a Prius. ("Hmm... $5000 more and I have a hybrid AND get bluetooth and that neato screen")
On the flip side, they'll get businesses to buy some too. Enterprises will stick with Blackberries because they use Exchange and like the security aspects of the device, but there are plenty of mid-level managers with purchase authority to spend $500-600.
Re:Regular people don't buy smartphones (Score:5, Insightful)
On the flip side, they'll get businesses to buy some too. Enterprises will stick with Blackberries because they use Exchange and like the security aspects of the device, but there are plenty of mid-level managers with purchase authority to spend $500-600.
Well, and lots of people are saying this will flop because it doesn't have Exchange support, but the fact is that Exchange supports IMAP and POP3. It's not as though users won't be able to get their business e-mail on this phone. Even when it comes to contacts and calendars, Apple could set the syncing in iTunes to grab that stuff from outlook.
If anything, I could see this influence going in the opposite direction-- instead of the lack of Exchange support hurting the iPhone, I think you might see the lack of iPhone support being counted against Exchange/Windows. I've worked in a few businesses of different sizes and all, and ultimately what gets supported is largely dependent on what technology the executives are infatuated with. A lot of the support for Blackberries within IT isn't because we love the devices, but because we had to support them or the president of the company would flip out. All his friends had Blackberries, and so he wanted one too. And then, once they're using Blackberries, we're locked further into using Windows on the desktop and Exchange in the datacenter, because that's what RIM supports.
Now if the iPhone becomes the hot new phone, and all the executives start demanding them, that's what IT will support. If you get better calendar/contact/e-mail syncing with a Mac on the desktop and an Xserve in the datacenter, this could be yet another boon for Apple.
I think they'll do it (Score:5, Funny)
1% of the market (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, that's more than 1%...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The iPhone is just a smokescreen (Score:5, Interesting)
The iPod line needed a reboot, and the iPhone was splashiest way to do it. In fact, this device is the logical evolution of the Newton MessagePad [retrothing.com]. Think about it. Apple realized that boring contact lists, calendars and handwriting recognition won't encourage the Unwashed Masses to adopt portable computers. People are far more media-centric than that.
The rejuvenated iPod lineup will tempt you with music, movies and games, while offering an addictive combination of go-anywhere Wi-Fi browsing and email. And you can bet that Apple is planning to open up third-party development as quickly as possible.
As for the iPhone device, the bleak reality is that it is slightly larger than a 5G iPod. Too big to slip into the pocket of my jeans, which means it's too large to use as my everyday phone. My hard drive-equipped iPod usually lives in a messenger bag on my shoulder or in a jacket pocket, simply because it's too bulky to function as an "everywhere" communications accessory. I wouldn't be willing to carry something as large or expensive as the iPhone with me everywhere I go. I'd look like a dork with my calculator on a belt clip. Besides, mobile phones are expensive enough to begin with and many people (especially students) will balk at the idea of committing to a 2 year $1000+ mobile voice/data/voicemail contract after shelling out $599 for the iPhone itself.
No, the real magic will happen when Apple releases a $299 version of this device - the next generation iPod - that retains everything but the GSM + EDGE phone technology. At that point, the iPod will be perfectly positioned to become everyone's favorite teeny-tiny ultraportable computer.
My ideal device (Score:3, Interesting)
There are a few quirks (what device doesn't have those?) but it is most of the way down the road.
The screen size and general form factor is about perfect; any bigger and it'd be too clunky, any smaller and it'd be too small to read - this is my biggest complaint with smartphones like the Treo family.
I've mated it to a Garmin GPS 10 BlueTooth GPS Reciever, and it makes a great driving GPS.
Here's what I think makes for a killer handheld device:
1) Same form factor as the LifeDrive; the LD screen is awesome.
2) Lots of storage, like ~80Gb, plus the SD slot;
3) BlueTooth connectivity, especially for headsets/headphones, but the device should act as a BlueTooth hub and be able to talk to anything;
4) Wireless G;
5) A multi-band GSM phone;
6) GPS;
7) A good MP3/Media player (should be able to play all reasonable media formats)
8) Enough processor power so it can play movies without skipping, redraw GPS maps seamlessly, and remain responsive to use input at all time.
The LifeDrive is ever so close, lacking primarily the phone, the storage space, and the processor power. The iPhone *almost* gets it right too.
Eventually, somebody will build one of these, and convergence will be complete.
DG
They need to sell 10M iPhones in 2008 (Score:5, Interesting)
I think Apple will sell a lot more than 10 million iPhones in 2008 when they add the iPhone nano to their lineup a year from now. I predict the iPhone nano will be physically smalelr and drop some of the pricey "smart phone" features of it's big brother. But it will still have the great interface and importantly, style, of it's big brother. Probably will come in colors too. $200-$300. That will fly off the shelves.
You heard it here first.
Spyky
Treo fan, but I'm sold. (Score:3, Interesting)
I hope they can get away from Cingular exclusivity as soon as possible, though I have had good luck with Cingular with a good plan, good price, and effectively unlimited minutes with rollover. It will be easy to remove the chip from my Treo and plug it into a iPhone. Given the infrastructure build on Cingular's part I understand why they did it, but I hope other carriers will make the changes necessary and find a way into this. To me it does not make marketing sense to go exclusive forever.
Given what they have done with Google Maps I think the iPhone is ripe for GPS. That would put it over the top for me. I don't use it very much, but when I do it is extremely handy. Plus it will knock the GPS-only systems out, or at least force them to reduce their sky-high prices. Navigation in a vehicle is $2K plus and the stand-alones push $1K easy.
In terms of "Apple arrogance," get over it. Around here that is the pot calling the kettle black.
Competition is good for everyone (Score:3, Insightful)
If this brings some innovation into a pretty stale market, that's great for everyone.
iPhone pricing (Score:3, Funny)
First Release (Score:4, Insightful)
This makes sense (IMHO). You launch your product in a small, dedicated, technical market first and then bring out your average joe consumer market product when you've got the wrinkles ironed out.
As for that dedicated market, people like me have been waiting for a phone like this for a long LONG time. I've spent well over $1300 on smart phones in the last 9 months and have been disappointed with them all. I couldn't give a damn what it costs - I just want it to work really well.
Like the light bulb marketing survey: (Score:5, Insightful)
1% in *2008* (Score:3, Insightful)
By 2008 several things will have happened. First, I'd anticipate that the price will have dropped by then. Second, anyone want to take a bet that the "multiyear exclusive deal" with Cingular is 2 years? Third, it will have undergone at least one revision (possibly with an "iPhone Mini" or somesuch in the middle). Finally, a lot of people will be buying new cell phones and possibly changing providers.
1% sounds extremely high to me as well, but it has to be kept in mind that they aren't talking immediately and this thing does a lot more than most smartphones.
track record. (Score:3, Funny)
Result: Arguably, Apple's most successful product ever.
CmdrTaco on the new iPhone: "They're going to print money with this thing."
Predicted result: Sell AAPL. Now.
An interesting comment from one of the blogs (Score:3, Interesting)
"I have zero interest in this cell phone. But I would love some version of this phone on my business desktop. Current business phones are atrocious. How to do conference calling, holding, transferring is just impossible to remember. Voicemail is a disaster. If they built something to work with PBX and the ability input contacts from Exchange then a $600 business desktop phone is probably cheap. I could see them making a lot more money in that space."
All of the disadvantages of using the iPhone as a cell phone disappear if it is targeted instead as a desk phone. Like the poster in that blog comment, while I have zero interest in the iPhone as a mobile phone (too fragile, too many cases where I need to "blind dial"), I would KILL to have that interface on my desk phone.
Proving that it's trendy to diss things on a blog! (Score:4, Insightful)
My number 1 gripe with people's assumptions is that the iPhone will be a 100% closed-product. This is bunk. Firstly, nobody official has said anything close to that. Just that development kits are not available at this time. Why is that? Let's think about it.
MacWorld is very much Apple's own personal CES. Takes place at the same time for more or less the same purpose: to introduce new products. This show is not so much about the developer because Apple already puts on a giant show just for them, WWDC.
As is widely known, Apple went to great lengths to keep the product a secret. So duh, no development kits were given to even the most tightly NDA'd partners. This thing was even kept secret to most of Apple's OWN employees. So it stands to reason they didn't want to mass-produce developments kits to have available at announcement. Beyond that, third-party software will undoubted bring up alot of flaws in the iPhone-specific parts of the OS and API. I'm sure they don't want somebody else's software mucking with the device at launch that could make it unstable or worse. That isn't to say they don't want third-party software running on it -ever-. Just not at first.
And I'm perfectly okay with that. This is a first-generation device. An Apple first generation device! These tend to be flakey. It does take time to work out the kinks and I'm okay with that too. I'm fairly sure that a dev kit will be available at or shortly after WWDC (hey, that's in June too... hmmmm). They just want time for people to use the device as they intended it.
Concerns about battery life are irrelevant at this point. We don't know how long it will really last. Could be better or worse than everybody is touting. But you know what I couldn't care less either way because I don't spend more than 5 hours per day mucking with or talking on my cell phone. I'm lucky if I can get an hour on even the most smartest of smartphones (and believe me, I've gone through alot of them). I'm willing to be most people won't either.
As for price, puh-lease. Go buy a Cingular 8525 (the super-duper 3G pda-phone that runs Windows Mobile). Aside from WM5 being the most sluggish piece of software on the planet, you'll find that it costs $585 (granted without 2yr contract). That's the same ball park. Same with the Blackjack which is $350 (again, without 2yr contract) but both phones come with negligable internal storage so add on another $100 for 2GB Micro-SD and you're still not close on storage. Some people like removable storage because you can swap cards. I have -never- owned more than 1 memory card for a format, so again, I couldn't care less. Especially considering 8GB is fairly substantial.
So I think most people's fears are overblown. The concern that could be given weight is the QWERTY touch keyboard. But that is a philosophical thing that has to be one way or another. Either you have dedicated tiny buttons or you go virtual and have a large screen. My side on this one is the large screen & virtual keyboard. That's just my preference. I have no need for tiny, fingernail splitting buttons so small that I accidentally press the wrong ones so I much prefer a keyboard on a large pretty screen that I accidentally press buttons on. Even if I wasn't such an Apple whore, I'd side with Steve on this one. Dedicated, ugly micro-keyboards suck (I'm looking at you, Blackjack). The 8525 was, for the most part, comfortable and quick to type on though.
Anyway, I'm sure the next few months will be filled with iPhone bashing as people speculate till their heart's content. I know I'll get one (I've gone through 4 different phones in the past month looking for one that doesn't suck) but the iPhone could very well disappoint me in use, but I won't know that until it comes out in June.
Deja Vu (Score:3, Insightful)
I remember everyone saying how the original iPod was too expensive, feature poor, no way it was going to compete in a market that already had the Rio, etc...
The iPod redefined the market for MP3 players.
As a long time Mac user, I've been listening to people predict the demise of Apple, the failure of it's products for decades.
The iPhone may be a disaster, or it may be as disruptive a technology as the iPod. Only time will tell.
Re:iPod Overpriced (Score:5, Insightful)
The iPhone will be the same way. This isn't apple fanboyism, this is grudging respect. look at the iPod. look at the cheif complaints about mobile phones in general. Not the slashdot complaints, but the complaints among the predominance of users.
1. Poor UI
2. Poor or shoddy design.
3. inability to use features on the phone, or limitations on the interoperability of those features.
Apple fixes these problems for a living. They fix them and then establish the solution at a high pricepoint, and people pay for it. No. it's not going to be unlocked, it's not going to run linux, it's probably only going to support limited software development, if any at all. But people will buy it, at least 10 million people, if not more.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
From the summary (Score:5, Insightful)
You mean the FUD campaign initiated by frightened competitors is flaring up. This story makes it seem like everyone is suddenly deciding not to buy the iPhone after "coming to their senses." Hardly the case. This thing will sell like crazy, and the fact Slashdot is posting a story saying it won't just means it will. Remember the iPod? The iPod mini? Slashdot said they'd fail.
Re:This phone has nothing new (Score:4, Interesting)
God, just thinking about the dock connector means I can plug this thing into my car for music, and continue to take phone calls during lunch, AND check my email and surf the web. All in the Subway parking lot.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Um, yes, Opera Software [opera.com] has been doing them for years. Its main success so far has, in fact, been in the mobile market with its full browser which uses the same core as the PC version. Nokia has used Opera for many years, Motorola signed up to use Opera a while ago, and recently Samsung joined in and wanted Opera's full mobile browser too. Lately, the full Opera browser has been included on Motorola ROKR, Razrx, MOTORAZR, A910, and more, and several Sony Er
Re: (Score:3)