The iPhone: Pretending to be a Smartphone?

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.istartedsomething.com/20070226/iphone-smartphone-ad/' target='_blank'>http://www.istartedsomething.com/20...-smartphone-ad/</a><br /><br /></div><img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/web/2003/phoneadexcerpt.jpg" /><br /><br />An amusing comic strip posted over at istartedsomething.com. It certainly raises the interesting point that a "smartphone" that you can't install applications onto isn't much of a smartphone...and when you factor in that it's not 3G, and there's no keyboard, you start to wonder how successful this will be among the I'll-pay-$500 mobile device crowd. It's still Apple, so there's some "wow" factor with the hardware design. Push IMAP email only through Apple? Puh-lease. I think Apple may discover that they can stick people with all sorts of proprietary junk if they're buying an iPod, but when it comes to phones people want it to do what <i>they</i> want it to do. Apple may face an uphill battle here...

[mesposito2]

Here's my take on what Apple is trying to do.

1. The feature set of the current announced iPhone is not the point.

Just like MS, Apple has the money to put out an initial device and build on it. I think the initial offering is very strong for the many phone users, although not necessarily for us geeks. (Phone, Voicemail, Internet, Email, SMS, Chat, Calendar, Contacts)

2. If you know the new Apple you can see that this is a new product LINE, not a new product.

Therefore counting the missing features is not really valid at this point, anymore than doing the same with Windows Mobile. Take note that Apple developed a special version of Mac OSX for the iPhone. This also shows that they are in this for the long haul.

3. Apple has wisely kept control over the device, which means THEY control software updates and not the cell provider.

That means that I would potentially not need to wait a year for a fix like I do now. To me this is huge for all of us, because hopefully it will put pressure on providers to release new functionality more often.

I agree that keeping it a closed environment is crappy for the high-end user. We'll see if that holds.

***big quote removed by moderator JD. please only quote small snippets, thanks***

[Frankie1]

The strip was extremely amusing. But you guys realy have to check this one out. It's Amazing http://techdigest.tv/2007/02/watch_the_iphon.html

[Jason Dunn]

3. Apple has wisely kept control over the device, which means THEY control software updates and not the cell provider.
That means that I would potentially not need to wait a year for a fix like I do now. To me this is huge for all of us, because hopefully it will put pressure on providers to release new functionality more often.

How do you know that though? Do you really think Cingular is going to let Apple push out updates for the iPhone, that's running on the Cingular network, without having it tested first? I'd be VERY surprised if that was the case.

[Paragon]

I think us Windows Mobile users have to stop damning the iPhone for what it isn't and start giving it credit for what it is. Otherwise you get caught drastically underestimating your competition.

First, it is not in the $500.00 range. Cingular have stated that it will now sell for $299.00 under contract. That changes the landscape considerably.

Secondly, we all put it down for having a closed system. Consider this, most glithes, resets, freeze ups, and other problems we run into with WM devices are attributed to 3rd party software. Having a closed system makes the possibility of having a rock solid device much easier to attain. Yes, I realize that many people want a more open system. I know I do, but the masses out there don't need or want much more functionality than what is built into the device.

Thirdly, as has been pointed out, this is just the first device to be released on the platform....I'm sure not going to be so quick to put this device down.

With Cingular's latest price of $299 this thing is now in the same price neighborhood as an iPod, only it does much more. It is going to sell HUGE, and so are its future counterparts.

......I do agree, the likelihood of carriers giving up control of updates it a real stretch.

As far a "Smartphone" goes, show me two authorities that actually agree on the meaning of "Smartphone"

Dave

[apeguero]

That whole $299 price thing was a fake. Many websites have reported it as being denied by Cingular. The price for this phone will be $499 or $599.

I like the idea of a closed system, somewhat, for stability reasons. But then again, I'm a geek and therefore like to change my devices to suit my own needs which is why I probably would never buy an iPhone. Now, sell the hardware but without cellular phone capabilities and add wifi? Then I would buy it because I really do like my iPod. Imagine how nice iPod version 6 would be if it were just like the iPhone.

Again, I'm not knocking the iPhone before it even comes out but I just can't see myself running around with a Pocket PC that I can't add, remove, or modify software on. I'll keep putting up with the unreliability of my hacked out but very cusomisable Cingular 8525 for the time being thank you very much.

[mesposito2]

3. Apple has wisely kept control over the device, which means THEY control software updates and not the cell provider.
That means that I would potentially not need to wait a year for a fix like I do now. To me this is huge for all of us, because hopefully it will put pressure on providers to release new functionality more often.

How do you know that though? Do you really think Cingular is going to let Apple push out updates for the iPhone, that's running on the Cingular network, without having it tested first? I'd be VERY surprised if that was the case.

I'm speculating (like everyone else here) based on what I've read about the unique nature of the Apple-Cingular deal. I do think that the deal allows them to do something that hasn't been done before, and that is to remain in control of the hardware device.

Of course I don't think that allows them to do things without Cingular's knowledge or sign-off, although maybe non-phone related software updates are doable with much less testing on the impact to the phone. If this is what they had in mind, I'm all for it.

[Paragon]

Of course I don't think that allows them to do things without Cingular's knowledge or sign-off, although maybe non-phone related software updates are doable with much less testing on the impact to the phone. If this is what they had in mind, I'm all for it.

There is a very good possibility this is in the works for Windows Mobile as well, with the new update feature. It could be the first step towards MS pushing actual OS updates directly to the end user.

Dave

[Gerard]

The strip was extremely amusing. But you guys realy have to check this one out. It's Amazing http://techdigest.tv/2007/02/watch_the_iphon.html

I concur with one of the comments made on that video page; wow, just wow. That dude is one heck of a clever programmer. He's bang on, echoing most of Steve Jobs' presentation a few weeks ago. How is it we've not seen this 'skin' or GUI thing show up for purchase? Oh right. Mac would sue him into the ground. And rightfully so I guess... but it's a great interface in some respects and it'd be nice if PPC users could add it to their already great devices. I don't like the whole Palm-like big buttons thing myself. The media list (or any list, such as Contacts might be nice) freewheeling is rather clever. It would be nice to at least try that for reading ebooks for instance, instead of using a stylus and dragging a button. Same for long web pages. A flip of the thumb and one could quickly scan for interesting articles. User-defined rate of scroll would be important.

Anyway, nice work, whoever you are Mr. Programmer. Hope you do well and don't get busted for this.

[Janak Parekh]

Mac would sue him into the ground. And rightfully so I guess... but it's a great interface in some respects and it'd be nice if PPC users could add it to their already great devices.
It makes perfect sense, though. Apple spent a huge amount of resources developing that user interface. It'd have been a different thing if someone else developed it first. In fact, one or two mobile companies tried to develop touch-oriented UIs for the Pocket PC way back when, but they were nowhere near as complete and never took off. The fact that this captures the imagination is a testament to the UI designers at Apple, as opposed to the UI designers at Microsoft, who seem focused on building business-centric devices first and foremost.

--janak

[Gerard]

In Redmond it's all about the 'Enterprise' (sales, but Enterprise sounds so very flashy). Is it because Bill is such a big Star Trek fan?