An IPod Cellphone Said to Be Imminent

[Jeremy Charette]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/30/technology/30apple.html' target='_blank'>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/30/technology/30apple.html</a><br /><br /></div><i>"Roger Entner, a telecommunications analyst with Ovum, a market research firm, said he had been told by an industry executive that the new phone, to be made by Motorola, would be marketed by Cingular Wireless. Mr. Entner said it would include iTunes software, which helps power the iPod."</i><br /><br /> <img src="http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/images/cing.jpg" /> <br /><br />Well now it's all but official. We'll probably have to wait until next week for specifics, but it looks like the iTunes phone is actually going to hit the market. It will be very interesting to see how well the concept of an all-in-one MP3 player/cell phone is executed, but given Apple and Motorola's past successes, it should be a slam dunk.

[Jerry Raia]

Motorolas track record for phone hardware is a disaster. Let's hope Apple knows what it is doing.

[sojourner753]

Motorolas track record for phone hardware is a disaster. Let's hope Apple knows what it is doing.

I have to agree. With the exception of the razr. But I've heard that even that one has a poor build quality.

My last motorola was the v600 and they were the ones that drove me to a smartphone. WM to be exact. It would take a lot to make me go back to a phone with a quasi (read: Phone OEM) OS.

[bdegroodt]

Why is Verizon always left out of the party???

On Motorola, I really can't agree with that statement on their last few model releases. I've had really good luck (in fact, better than any other phone I've owned) with my last 2 Motos (V710,T720). I will, however, say that their phonebook is awful. I really wish they'd go to something closer to Nokia's interface. But my RF and bluetooth performance on my most recent Moto is the best I've ever had. I hope they can overcome the MS OS issues on that "Q" and bring it to Verizon--Drool!

[sub_tex]

from the photos of the phone that have been online for months, the phone doesn't look very good at all.

This isn't a slick Apple product. It's a Moto phone running slick apple software instead. :(

Now, if Apple were to actually make a phone themselves. . .

[Jerry Raia]

This isn't a slick Apple product. It's a Moto phone running slick apple software instead. :(

It's almost a guarantee if Moto is making it it will be lacking in some major way.

[James Fee]

It's almost a guarantee if Moto is making it it will be lacking in some major way.Ditto, I haven't seen a good Motorola product since the old startac phones.

[randalllewis]

I guess it is up to me to be contrary here. I know the thing to do is bash Motorola and I did have a crappy moto phone a few years back when I was with Verizon. Since I switched to Cingular, I've purchased two moto phones- one for work (the Razr) and one for personal use (V551) and I have no complaints. The Bluetooth connection on both phones has been flawless, the Razr has dropped two calls in the time I've had it and the 551 has yet to drop one. I will agree the moto's idea of a phonebook isn't the best I've seen, but the phones are both reliable with good sound and they both look good too. I don't know where the comment about build quality of the Razr comes from other than the posts on the HowardChai site about how you can't make the Razr lie flat (so what) without breaking it. I try not to believe any blanket characterizations of any company because our personal experiences (and even shared experiences from a handful of posters on websites) is not always reliably indicative of the total output of any organization.

[Jerry Raia]

I try not to believe any blanket characterizations of any company because our personal experiences (and even shared experiences from a handful of posters on websites) is not always reliably indicative of the total output of any organization.

That goes both ways. All just personal opinions. :wink:

[klinux]

Motorolas track record for phone hardware is a disaster.

Boy, talking about painting with a broad brush stroke.

RAZR is an unqualified financial success. Its i series was used exclusively by Nextel. And let's not forget the StarTac which is considered as one of the pinnacles in both sales and cell phone design (much like Palm V in the PDA design world).

With three huge successes, I would hardly consider that to be a disaster.

[Jerry Raia]

Motorolas track record for phone hardware is a disaster.

Boy, talking about painting with a broad brush stroke.

RAZR is an unqualified financial success. Its i series was used exclusively by Nextel. And let's not forget the StarTac which is considered as one of the pinnacles in both sales and cell phone design (much like Palm V in the PDA design world).

With three huge successes, I would hardly consider that to be a disaster.

The RAZR is just a dressed up StarTac and you are right that was a success. If you are talking old world phones then yes Moto was good. Can I sell you an MPx220 or a v600 (not a smartphone but a mess nonetheless) perhaps? Cheap? We are talking Smartphone here and they have failed so far in my view.

[klinux]

The RAZR is just a dressed up StarTac.

I do not think that is a fair argument. One can essentially make arguements ad infinitum e.g. Google is just a dressed up Yellow Pages or OS X is just dressed up BSD or Maybach is just a dressed up Mercedes or HDTV is just a dressed up EDTV. It is really apple and oranges.

Can I sell you an MPx220 or a v600 (not a smartphone but a mess nonetheless) perhaps? Cheap? We are talking Smartphone here and they have failed so far in my view.

I won't deny you that Moto has had some duds or even many duds but which phone manufacturer has not? Morover, this not whether Motorola was cheap or expensive nor was this discussion limited to SmartPhone or whether they made the phone in the color you wanted. You are shifting the target.

Going back to the argument a hand: You said Motorola's track record was a disaster when it comes to phones and I argued otherwise and cited at least three major successes.

[Jerry Raia]

You said Motorola's track record was a disaster when it comes to phones and I argued otherwise and cited at least three major successes.

Point taken. I should have been more specific. I still have my old StarTac sitting in my desk drawer. It was indeed a good phone. But you concede their Smartphone offerings and quite a few non Smartphones have just not measured up? We are talking about a Smartphone here. I say they have to prove its worth. We should be skeptical.

[sojourner753]

We are talking about a Smartphone here. I say they have to prove its worth. We should be skeptical.

I realize that its subjective to some degree, but I'll pose the question anyway.

Granted I'm always guilty of scanning versus reading, but I don't remember mention this being a smartphone. Just a phone with one custom application in it.

Did I miss something?

[Jerry Raia]

Did I miss something?

No you are right, it doesn't say that anyplace. Ok but I am still skeptical of Motorola's ability to pull this off.

[sojourner753]

Jerry,

Your ground seems to be getting a bit shaky. :lol:

j/k

[Jerry Raia]

Jerry,

Your ground seems to be getting a bit shaky. :lol:

j/k

:rofl:

[James Fee]

OK how about this... Motorola hasn't made a CDMA phone worth a damn since the 90's. 8O

RAZR might be nice, but I'd never know on Verizon.

[Jerry Raia]

OK how about this... Motorola hasn't made a CDMA phone worth a damn since the 90's. 8O

I'm in total agreement!

[klinux]

First this:
I haven't seen a good Motorola product since the old startac phones.

Then this:
OK how about this... Motorola hasn't made a CDMA phone worth a damn since the 90's..

Hate to nitpick here but... :twisted:

StarTac 7860W, 7867W, and 7868W are all CDMA phones made by Motorola.

Disclaimer - I do not work for Motorola and have never even owned a Motorola phone! :)

[James Fee]

Hate to nitpick here but... :twisted:

StarTac 7860W, 7867W, and 7868W are all CDMA phones made by Motorola.Where those made in the last few years? If so the design dates from the late 90s. Every good phone that Motorola makes is not available on CMDA. That is a fact.Disclaimer - I do not work for Motorola and have never even owned a Motorola phone! :)I did marry into a Motorola family (though my wife now works for Intel after Motorola fell apart here in Phoenix with On and Freescale breaking off). I probably could get deals though her parents on phones, but I don't see any CDMA phone that is worth taking advantage of.

[James Fee]

Hate to nitpick here but... :twisted:

StarTac 7860W, 7867W, and 7868W are all CDMA phones made by Motorola.Where those made in the last few years? If so the design dates from the late 90s. Every good phone that Motorola makes is not available on CMDA. That is a fact.Disclaimer - I do not work for Motorola and have never even owned a Motorola phone! :)I did marry into a Motorola family (though my wife now works for Intel after Motorola fell apart here in Phoenix with On and Freescale breaking off). I probably could get deals though her parents on phones, but I don't see any CDMA phone that is worth taking advantage of.

[Jerry Raia]

Alright lets refocus for a moment. First I have owned more Moto phones than I can remember and most have been good but Moto has laid some big eggs lately. It is safe to be concerned about their new offerings until they prove otherwise.

[klinux]

I promise my last post on this topic but I am just having too much fun here. :)

Using proof, symbolic logic, rules of inference, blah blah, here's how to break it down:

Premise 1: Motorola made StarTac CDMA phones.
The StarTac 786x series were sold in 2000 and 2001 by Bell Atlantic, Sprint PCS, and Telus. This is published information and can be easily verified by a search.
Premise 2: StarTac phones are good.
This is generally accepted as true but even if not, it is true for James who stated "I haven't seen a good Motorola product since the old startac phones."
Conclusion: Motorola made good CDMA phones.


Now that we have established that, let's look at argument #1:
Motorola hasn't made a CDMA phone worth a damn since the 90's..
As established above, Motorola made good CDMA phones after 90s. Therefore, the above argument is false.

Argument #2:
Every good phone that Motorola makes is not available on CMDA. That is a fact.
StarTac was made by Motorola, was available in CDMA, and was good. Therefore, the above argument is false as well.

[Jerry Raia]

My head hurts now. :lol: