Apple iPhone

[wildcat]

Hey, the Apple iPhone is about to roll this week. Only $500-600 for a friggin phone . I saw people on the television waiting in line to buy one and I just thought about how those people keep the spending portion of our economy going strong.

I'm still using my old cell phone that looks like it has been to WWII and back again.

Apple - iPhone

 

[saluki9]

If the thing had a real keyboard and supported BES I would be in line to buy the first one

 

[ERD50]

If the thing had a real keyboard and supported BES I would be in line to buy the first one

OK, but if the thing had a real keyboard, there probably wouldn't be a line to buy them.

Were there lines for RAZR or any other 'cell phone'?

I have no idea if this thing is going to a success or not, but it sure is getting some media attention.

-ERD50

 

[wildcat]

If the thing had a real keyboard and supported BES I would be in line to buy the first one

Buy you one if the Bears win the Super Bowl

 

[yakers]

Buy you one if the Bears win the Super Bowl

The Bears didn't win? I swear I watched the first minute or two and it looked like they had it tied up.

 

[saluki9]

Buy you one if the Bears win the Super Bowl

That's a deal!

 

[bright eyed]

Can we curb this standing in line phenomenon for every crap thing that goes on the market? video games, movies, the disney ride...we need to promote some hobbies or something for folks...why not wait and see if the phone is worth all the hype? why be the test rabbit to see what the 1st generation missed?

are these real people or just folks the marketers paid to create hype (hey jr, i'll give you $20 bucks to stand here and eagerly await this new sneaker, gadget, record, whatever)...maybe they are droids and if you poke them you will find out they are made of tin.

 

[ERD50]

Can we curb this standing in line phenomenon for every crap thing that goes on the market?

Last I heard, this is still a (relatively) free country. I'm not standing in line for one (99.999% sure I won't be buying one either).

But I'm happy that people are willing to stand in line for the new stuff. Companies make back their investment on the early adopters, then I get to buy gen 3 at a reasonable price. Capitalism and free markets are sooo cool.

There are reports that people are *paying* others $200-$300 to stand in line for them. Hey, I don't get it either, but who am I to judge? I probably do some things they would consider wacky.

-ERD50

 

[kcowan]

I have held AAPL since it was $13 because I believe Jobs is a visionary leader. (Sold 900 of them at $78.) But still holding the 300 because:

1) Apple is reinventing the user interface

This is not aimed at power cell phone users. They are happy with their cell phones, Palms and Blackberries. This is a new kind of information appliance aimed at road warriers who want PC-type functionality in their pocket. Who are these people? I dunno. Not me for sure. But then I have never owned an Apple product. Will the wireless carriers promote them. Oh yea. There are big fees to be earned from wireless internet access.

Why have a GPS in your car sitting in the garage when it can be in your pocket?

Why have your pictures in your camera and on your PC when you can have them in your pocket?

Why sit at your PC to buy things when you can do it on the bus/train on the way home from work?

Like they did for the iPod, 3rd parties will develop:
- Bluetooth keyboard - for the power user
- TV docking station - to play streamed movies on your flat screen home theater system
- etc.

2) New users will buy a Mac because it will be totally integrated with the Apple experience.

- Why buy a PC when all your early experience is with Apple products
- 100 million iPod users cannot be wrong
- grew at 36% with the highest margins of any PC vendor

3) Movies, tunes and other services will generate continuing revenues for both AAPL and the wireless carriers.

This will be a tough market though. Not a greenfield like the iPod so expect the rollout to be slower with lots of competition.

 

[bssc]

Plus another 2000 over two years for the service contract. People seem to forget that. I expect a bunch on threads on FW from people asking how to get out of the contract.

I find it interesting that people are willing to stand in line for it but it is a free country and I have done well financially by owning companies that profit off instant gratification.

One of these days I might get a cell phone. My friend now has two Blackberries, one for work and one for personal. I just email her.

 

[ladelfina]

I have never bought Apple stock though I have been on the brink several times and have always chickened out!! (sob!!) Why can't I learn to trust my instincts (food for another thread)?
---
DH is working on some software with "smart phones" and bought a Qtek model for $400-$500. It runs Windows Mobile 5. I personally couldn't care less, but there are a lot of web and interactive things that are going to develop (and are developing) that are going to make super-phones desireable for a good segment of users.

I'm not talking about downloading TV espisodes and crap like that (though some people may find that appealing as users and profitable as providers). What he's currently working on is a real estate database by which agents can remotely access and update listings and photos. He was talking to a landscaper that would love to work with pricing, scheduling, client estimates, employee timesheets, etc. remotely with a phone rather than a whole PC. There are and will be huge usability issues, but let's wait and see.. Apple certainly has the lead in usability for now... (and DH is going nuts with M$ and Access!!)

Things will only get better and adapt and improve; it's not a good idea to stick our heads in the sand and say "who wants it??" like I'm sure folks did with the invention of the telephone, TV, motorcar, etc.

 

[ERD50]

DH is working on some software ...

What he's currently working on is a real estate database by which agents can remotely access and update listings and photos.

He was talking to a landscaper that would love to work with pricing, scheduling, client estimates, employee timesheets, etc. remotely with a phone rather than a whole PC.

ladelfina - interesting. If the software that your husband is working on can be accessed and inputs made through a web browser, then the iPhone (or any device with a browser) could work with it.

If the iPhone (or other browser capable devices) take off - that could be a big plus for his software. In addition, browser access makes the SW platform independent (any version of Windows, OSX, Linux - all the same for the client).

-ERD50

 

[ladelfina]

Yes.. it's the back end that is somewhat the issue since Windows rules here even more so than in the US.

The landscaper also has issues of a phone or Palm device that can stand up to rugged conditions: being dropped, getting dirty, being used (or at least answered quickly?) with gloves, and so forth. There are industrial PocketPCs that exist but those are even further out in price. Again, it will evolve with time.

 

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

For years I've been dependent on a cell phone, beeper (cell phones don't work in large sections of most hospitals), and a palm device. I've tried everything from Blackberries to Treos to Windows-based PDAs. None has proven practical as a combo device.

If the iPhone or any other product succeeds at that, I'd try it. The presence of a version of Mac OSx and open-architecture re: 3rd party development are promising. I could not care less about games, videos, toys, ring tones etc. I just want a practical form of data input (even a compact foldable detachable keyboard) and a means of getting documents to my Mac computer.

I'll be sitting out the iPhone debut but certainly plan on keeping an eye on how it evolves.

 

[bssc]

For years I've been dependent on a cell phone, beeper (cell phones don't work in large sections of most hospitals), and a palm device. I've tried everything from Blackberries to Treos to Windows-based PDAs. None has proven practical as a combo device.

If the iPhone or any other product succeeds at that, I'd try it. The presence of a version of Mac OSx and open-architecture re: 3rd party development are promising. I could not care less about games, videos, toys, ring tones etc. I just want a practical form of data input (even a compact foldable detachable keyboard) and a means of getting documents to my Mac computer.

I'll be sitting out the iPhone debut but certainly plan on keeping an eye on how it evolves.

I don't think that this is a function of the phone but of the cellular towers that broadcast the signal. When I worked in the Biomedical Engineering department, one of our functions was to maintain the beeper repeating station. It was a relay on the hospital roof that would catch the signals and broadcast them down. And radiology still didn't always get their pages for obvious reasons so there was a voice paging system. Our radio guy didn't like cell phones so there was no repeating tower for that signal, which is what you would need to make the iPhone work.

 

[Robert the Red]

Our radio guy didn't like cell phones so there was no repeating tower for that signal, which is what you would need to make the iPhone work.

Or a WiFi network in the hospital. The networking capabilities of the iPhone would still work then (but the phone part wouldn't).

 

[TromboneAl]

It will be a success if

1. It works well to dial without a physical keyboard.

2. It works to use the Internet on a 480 x 320 screen, shown here:

 

[ladelfina]

Al.. that looks like a full version of Firefox; mobile versons further reduce the header/tools to save on real estate and do other funky display mgmt. stuff:

Microsoft Internet Explorer Mobile – Access Mobile Internet with Pocket IE
Opera Mobile™
Minimo project page

There's a difference, too, in handing "regular" web pages versus just inputting or extracting company data in company- and mobile-specific applications, which is what DH is working on. In the second case you don't need the browser frame at all. A web page is "serving" and collecting data back and forth with the app on the phone, is the idea.

 

[kcowan]

Yea this redesign of the interface is another constraint to rollout. Each app has to be reengineered to use the touchscreen. As Al's picture illustrates, you would not want traditional browser overheads. But that is already a constraint on using the web from cell phones.

The other constraint is AT&T. Yuck!

 

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

The other constraint is AT&T. Yuck!

You got that right. If I were in the market that alone would make me hesitate long and hard. They are updating their network, etc. but that company has been miserable in customer service as well as network quality.

The Mac press says it was chosen because it gave Apple wide range on design and technical issues. Plus a $60 package will give unlimited net access and 450 minutes.

This not the iPod market. Apple will have to be very clever and sophisticated, but if anyone has the cash and track record to do it, it's Apple. This'll be fun to watch, from a distance.

 

[ERD50]

Yea this redesign of the interface is another constraint to rollout. Each app has to be reengineered to use the touchscreen. As Al's picture illustrates, you would not want traditional browser overheads. But that is already a constraint on using the web from cell phones.

Not exactly. OSX takes care of the interface - the app is going to treat themulti-touch inputs the same as the equivalent mousing commands.

a better look (video) at the web browser here:

Apple - iPhone - TV Ads - Watered Down

Sure, you can only do so much on a screen that size, but they do a good job within that constraint. - better than you might think.

The other constraint is AT&T. Yuck!

Well, one thing you must consider here, is that, ummm, well, and... OK you're right. Cingular stinks.

I suspect people are going to rely more and more on the WiFi connection as time goes on.

-ERD50

 

[TromboneAl]

Al.. that looks like a full version of Firefox; mobile versons further reduce the header/tools to save on real estate and do other funky display mgmt. stuff:

Yes, that's right. But whenever you remove something from the screen, you make it more cumbersome to get to.

For example, remove the back button, and every time you want to go back, you have to first get the back button back.

The Apple ads make it look like browsing on the iPhone will be as easy as browsing on a laptop. I hope that reading, at least, is a good experience on the iPhone, since I would like eBooks to take off some day.

 

[whitestick]

In addition, browser access makes the SW platform independent (any version of Windows, OSX, Linux - all the same for the client).
-ERD50

That's true only if the developer keeps in mind the common parameters and capabilities of the various browsers. I keep running into MS IE developers that apparently think that is the only thing on the planet, and they use functions that are only present in the IE browser, causing other browsers to break or display improperly. If they develop for the Mac supported browsers - Safari or FireFox, then that shouldn't be a problem for other browsers as well.

 

[ERD50]

That's true only if the developer keeps in mind the common parameters and capabilities of the various browsers. I keep running into MS IE developers that apparently think that is the only thing on the planet, and they use functions that are only present in the IE browser, causing other browsers to break or display improperly. If they develop for the Mac supported browsers - Safari or FireFox, then that shouldn't be a problem for other browsers as well.

Whitestick, I understand what you are saying, but please allow me to do a little bit of technical nit-picking. From wiki 'browser'

Protocols and standards

Web browsers communicate with Web servers primarily using HTTP (hypertext transfer protocol) to fetch webpages. ... The most commonly used HTTP is HTTP/1.1, which is fully defined in RFC 2616. HTTP/1.1 has its own required standards that Internet Explorer does not fully support, but most other current-generation Web browsers do.

So, developers don't need to code 'for Safari, FireFox, etc', they just need to code per standards. After that, it is up to the browser to de-code it correctly, something that IE is not good at and Safari is.

And as you point out, developers end up coding to account for IE's peculiarities. Sometimes this happens because Microsoft builds these peculiarities into the tools they provide the developers - and then other compliant browsers appear to be 'broken'. Coincidence, or monopolistic practice?

Ohhh - more 'good stuff' from wiki:

Safari 2 was the first browser to pass the Acid2 test.

Although Internet Explorer has also been moving towards better CSS, its author, Microsoft, has publicly stated that Acid2 is not one of their primary focuses, and that Internet Explorer 7 does not pass the test.[5]

Acid2 is a test case designed by the Web Standards Project to identify web page rendering flaws in browsers and authoring tools.

So little Apple can make a compliant browser, and Microsoft 'chooses not too'? Interesting, no?

Thanks -ERD50

 

[Alex]

I think this is going to be a blockbuster product that will earn AAPL billions in profit and goodwill. If I were an early adopter (EA) I'd probably want one. But I am not even close to an EA, Heck, I only bought an I-pod 2 months ago! SO, I'll wait and see what happens.

PS - I love my I-pod. I wish I'd bought it sooner!