Apple’s iPhone was the talk of the town after its January 9 launch. Industry observers were by and large impressed with the new device, praising its user interface, innovation, and seamless integration. But two senior ABI Research analysts — wireless research director Stuart Carlaw, and principal mobile broadband analyst Philip Solis — point out that while the iPhone is undoubtedly clever and capable, it is not correct to call it a smartphone, as much of the media has done.
ABI Research defines a smartphone as a cellular handset using an open, commercial operating system that supports third party applications. The iPhone runs the Apple Macintosh computer operating system, OS X, so at first glance it would seem to fall into the smartphone category, which might help justify its announced $500+ pricetag. But, says Solis in a press release, “It turns out that this device will be closed to third party applications. Therefore we must conclude at this point that, based on our current definition, the iPhone is not a smartphone: it is a very high-end feature phone.”
Feature phones’ functionality (dictated by the software which controls the hardware) is closed and controlled by an operator or the device manufacturer, whereas smartphones are supported by a third-party ecosystem, where competition in the software space creates applications that add value. “Sure,” concedes Solis, “feature phones have third party applications too – but these are relatively weak and limited applications that work with the middleware such as Java and BREW. Applications designed for smartphones can be written to access core functionality from the OS itself, and are therefore usually more powerful and efficient. The competition in an open environment also yields more cutting edge, rich applications.”
Stuart Carlaw adds, “Consumers will not be willing to settle for a second-rate cell phone just to have superior music. Apple must get the phone engineering part of the equation right, and it is difficult to see how they will accomplish that with no track record in the industry. Even though they are working with some prominent suppliers, the task of putting all of the building blocks together cannot be underestimated.”
More info: http://www.abiresearch.com/products/service/Mobile_Devices_Research _Service
Correct. Apple’s iPhone is not a so-called “smartphone.” It’s much, much more; as Tim Bajarin, principal analyst with Creative Strategies, said of Apple’s iPhone, “This goes beyond smartphones and should be given its own category called ‘brilliant’ phones.” At least initially, iPhone users will get software from just one source. Thankfully, that sole source, Apple Inc., just happens to make the best software in the world. Apple understands very well that too many cooks in the kitchen spoil the broth.
In the future, we expect Apple to follow along the lines of iPod and vet third-party software (ie., games) to ensure the best possible iPhone user experience. When the first iPhone game from Electronic Arts appears for sale on the iTunes Store, will ABI Research then define iPhone as a “smartphone?” As if it matters what ABI Research’s definition happens to be. Apple doesn’t usually conform to someone else’s definitions, they often creates new ones.
Related articles:
Research in Motion downgraded due to Apple iPhone competition – January 23, 2007
RealMoney: Apple just blew up the whole damn mobile-phone supply chain with its new iPhone – January 11, 2007
eWeek: Apple iPhone fallout: ‘They must be crying in Nokia-ville and other telephony towns today’ – January 10, 2007
Jefferies downgrades Motorola on fears of market share loss to Apple iPhone – January 10, 2007
The massive FUD campaign against Apple’s iPhone ramps up – January 10, 2007
Time: ‘iPhone could crush cell phone market pitilessly beneath the weight of its own superiority’ – January 09, 2007
Analyst: Apple iPhone should be given its own category – ‘brilliantphone’ – January 09, 2007
Apple debuts iPhone: touchscreen mobile phone + widescreen iPod + Internet communicator – January 09, 2007
can they show that they used this particular definition before the iphone was announced? or is it an opportunistic redefinition of ‘smart’?
who died and made these guys the boss???? who decided that they were able to unilaterally decide what a smart phone is? talk about arrogance.
O RLY!?
Any connection between “broth” “brothel” “brother”? Weird. And isn’t it simply, “too many cooks spoil the broth?” Whatever. The iPhone will seriously rock! (Just don’t let your brother at the brothel drop it in the broth!) 😀
Just for fun. Wiki’s definition:
A smartphone is any electronic handheld device that integrates the functionality of a mobile phone, personal digital assistant (PDA) or other information appliance. This is often achieved by adding telephone functions to an existing PDA (PDA Phone) or putting “smart” capabilities, such as PDA functions, into a mobile phone.[1]
A key feature of a smartphone is that applications for enhanced data processing and connectivity can be installed on the device[2], by contrast to regular phones which support sandboxed applications. These applications may be developed by the manufacturer of the device, by the operator or by any other third-party software developer. “Smart” functionality includes any additional interface including a miniature QWERTY keyboard, a touch screen, or even just secure access to company mail, such as is provided by a BlackBerry.
It amazes me how analyst after analyst can underestimate Apple, Inc. in the year 2007.
Apple has said it won’t allow third party apps to be downloaded and installed on the iPhone, not that it won’t allow third party developers to develop apps, submit them to Apple for testing and approval, and be available for sale through iTunes.
These guys kill me. The iPhone is not a “SmartPhone” because it doesn’t support third party install-when-you-want apps? So the phone’s not a SmartPhone because you can’t buy crap to put on it? A SmartPhone should be defined by what it can do, not by who can install apps on it.
I have installed a bunch of apps for my Palm, or at least looked at a ton of them. Most weren’t worth $5, never mind the $30 they were asking for.
Wikipedia discusses a definition of what constitutes a smartphone and specifically lists the iPhone as one. But the article does mention that it’s difficult to specify exactly what qualifies as a smartphone.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone
Note that Master Huckster Steve had three of ’em on the podium – an indication that there was an expectation of the dreaded failure during the keynote. So, there is every reason to believe this thing may not be as magic as all the fawning would seem to indicate.
I’ll be waiting to see what kind of consumer experience breaks out in June. Will it work or will the screen go black when the finger is applied. Most important question of all: will Cingular make reliable connections or will Cingular perform in June as they are in January – which, as we have heard over and over and over on this forum, is very lousy.
Fork over $500 or $600 for one of these and hold your breath that it meets your expectations, especially when you walked right by a half dozen cell phones that do all these things that cost absolutely nothing.
Will Steve be available to answer the question of why did the thing go black when I tried to send the photo? Why did the thing go black when I tried to conference in Fred. Why did the picture not tilt over, as it was suppose to, when I wanted to view it in landscape? Or, will both Steve and Cingular offer some recorded message from China that says how much they appreciate your business and please press 2 for more options. Huh?
What Wiki says:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feature_Phone
iPhone deserves its own category.
Boy oh Boy, what duffus er duffi, er what ever you call really dumb bunnies. LOL
“ABI Research defines a smartphone as” something that they have no clue to. They may also define a personal computer as a machine that runs Windows operating systems. YEP. Duffi to be sure. LOL
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
N.
All I can say is, when the iPhone comes out you better have a clear line to your broker and plenty of liquid cash. All of this yapping-dog-at-the-heals yoddle will fade quicly as we watch our Apple investments steadly rise from April-December, and break well over $120/share.
Whoa – where did that come from – its like I was having a vision. I’m calling my broker right now… See ya.
Now I can’t wait to get this phone just to rub it in the faces of everyone else.
“Oh look. Your phone has a keyboard. How cute. Awwwwwwwww.”
Of course you all realize that Micro$oft is going to find some “friendly” people to edit that smartphone definition…
Right, a better name would be overpriced dumb phone.
“We’ll See” –
Speaking as someone who has organised and run mac based conferences and presentations, it’s not unusual to have three of every piece of equipment (like Steve had with the iPhone) when the event is on.
It’s called “proper back up” and every serious professional will have it as a matter of course.
Frankly, at this stage I no longer care until it gets launched and we can actually try it and know exactly what it can and can’t do or be made to do.
You’ve got to listen to the analysts. My friggin God, man. There is sense and there is a non kind of sense.
Irrelevant example: A vampire is not a vampire if the vampire clips off the vampires own toe tag. Sure, it’s a technicality but is this really irrelevant? Oh, God, yes! See, so it is with smartphones and analysts. If the analyst removes the smartphone from his ass it’s still a phone but no longer a ‘smart’ phone and no longer is the analyst qualified to address the subject.
Now, imagine yourself an analyst with a smartpphone up your ass. I think you’re finally getting it.
This is true even steve jobs calles it a “Smarter Smartphone”!
Smartphone is what I have a drawer full of… Blackberry, Palm, Treo all SUCK !!!
I get more spam on my Blackberry than office mail.
Anything would be better, and if Apple controls the software all the better. Then I can get it to sync with my phone.
Business needs an IT enima and Apple will do it.
Babs
“ABI Research” ???
Yeah right….what dribble….what an obvious attempt to get noticed.
The thing isn’t out yet…we are all going on demo’s…..and the demo’s i’ve seen make it the “Smartest” smartphone i’ve ever seen.
friggin idiots….
I have not seen, and perhaps you can enlighten us all, any study that compares QOS (quality of service) from Verizon, T-Mobile and Cingular. All we ever hear is
“Everyone knows Cingular is lousy”….or “T-Mobile is crap” or “Verizon sucks”…By what measures are all cell phone carriers rated. Fewest dropped calls? That’s what Cingular claims.
Until I see a truly credible story I won’t criticize Apple’s decision. All cellphones and carriers have their limitations and problems. I hear it about all of them.
Anyone care to show us all a study that demonstrates who is really “best?”
mw=real … as in Get Real
They are right, it is not a smartphone. That would be a disservice to Appl who I think has created a new, higher echelon category…called Brilliant phone.
Sure, the iPhone doesn’t fit ABI research’s definition of a smart phone. But it’s smart in a way no one else has been able to achieve–the way humans can intuitively interact with it. IMO, that’s as smart as you can make a device designed for humans who can reason and have human sized fingers.
True, the iPhone won’t be pigeonholed with all the rest. It’s a whole new category unto itself.
pr:
Fewest dropped calls = We suck less than the others.
I use Cingular, and I found that my old (givaway with contract) Nokia pulled in signals better than my upgraded Sony Ericsson bluetooth phone. I hope the iPhone excels in it’s “killer app”– phone calls.
Wow I am so glad to hear Stuart Carlaw’s and Philip Solis’s opinion on this matter….
Now I can go on with my life.
From now on ppl…everytime somebody at Apple tries to release a new product, they need to ask themselves…What would Stuart Carlaw think?
Just my $0.02
YA RLY!
Um, why are people using Wikipedia as an authoritative source for anything? You might as well just say “I’m right because I say so.”
Oh good God.
THese guys dont even deserve a response. I can’t believe they wrote an entire article about how the iPhone can’t be called a smartphone. It’s beyond retarded. It’s simple guys. If you like the phone and what it can do, and are willing to pay the price… then buy it. Otherwise don’t. Who cares what class of phone it falls into? Of all the “features” of this phone, I dont think anyone is going to sit there and say “Oh.. this phone rocks.. if only it conformed to the formal definition of smartphone I would buy it.”
@We’ll See – Thats a pretty silly argument. Of course Steve had 3 iPhones at the podium. He is giving a live demo, that will eventually be seen by hundreds of thousands of people, of a pre-release product that is still 6 MONTHS away from being shipped. The best presenters always have a backup. (in this case he had 2)
I tells you nothing about the final quality of hte device.
“Will Steve be available to answer the question of why did the thing go black when I tried to send the photo?” No but I assume Apple support would be there for this kind of thing. Call me crazy but I dont call Bill Gates to inform him of every BSOD I get.
“…Apple must get the phone engineering part of the equation right, and it is difficult to see how they will accomplish that with no track record in the industry…”
Challenging Apple to out-engineer you is a recipe for disaster. Next to macs, cell phones are toys.
MDN:
“When the first iPhone game from Electronic Arts appears for sale on the iTunes Store, will ABI Research then define iPhone as a “smartphone?” “
Probably not because they said,
““feature phones have third party applications too – but these are relatively weak and limited applications”…like the iPod games.
iPhone needs a whole new category as it has redefined the word “smart”. It should be called something else.
I never knew that the term “smart” meant only for
3rd-party conglomeration of dumb connecting ideas.
They now should be called dumbphones.
They’re all so used to phones being HARD, FIXED, and inflexible that they’re missing the point that the iPhone is SOFTWARE driven – I won’t necessarily have to buy a 2nd generation iPhone as much as I will be able to updat the software on the one I am absolutely going to buy in JUNE!
Did ABI Research get one to play with before knowing it all?? I don’t think so.
Does anyone who was actually at the keynote write any articles pooping the iPhone? I don’t think so. Has anyone who was actually allowed to play with one pooped the iPhone? I don’t think so. The guys who are writing all the articles were at CES, instead. They were at the wrong keynote along with their dumbphones. Apple envyists!
“You might as well just say “‘I’m right because I say so.'”
So true. Usually these threads contain simple, rational declarations that are pertinent, even-tempered, logical, bereft of bizarre comparisons to politics, nationality or religion and backed up with widely accepted references.
More idiots who don’t know what they’re talking about and have never even looked at the iPhone.
It’s running OSX for gods sake! Some people write with there heads up there @$$.
Anaysts sell out — that’s their business model. But they are very concerned that they never look like they are selling out, so that makes tem prickly to work with. <—Microsoft Effective Evangelism document.
They seem to be following the model: “Developers, developers, developers—> The competition in an open environment also yields more cutting edge, rich applications <—like iTunes, eh?
And now for the money shot—> Consumers will not be willing to settle for a second-rate cell phone just to have superior music.
And the payoff—> Uh, can you give us dollars this time? We’re awash with xboxes and can’t even sell the zunes.
— Sorry guys, we can only give you promotional copies of Vista this time.
Oh, and closed doesn’t mean that 3rd party developers will not be able to develop software for the iPhone. It only means that Apple will Q.C. there application before they allow it to be installed on the iPhone.
So don’t call it a “smart phone.” Big deal. Compared to other so-called smartphones, iPhone is far “smarter” and it is far more than just a “phone.”
spare us all about “closed” system vs “open” system bullcrap!! This FUD writer is NO SMART WRITER!!
I can totally understand the reason why Apple wants to keep the iPhone locked for now but it wouldn’t surprise me a bit if they decided to release in the future “Apple iPhone certified” widgets, developed externally. games will certainly make an appearance soon after the release as well IMO.
Now that Smart Phone OS’ have been declared ‘Open’ I wont feel to bad when I make copies of them. I wish these guys would not call Symbian, Palm or WinCE, since I assume they are not referring to Linux. Guys, it just makes you sound ignorant or bigoted!
Had Apple called it something other than “iPhone” it’d be a different story. If I had one, the feature that I’d probably use the least would be, yes, the PHONE. But it’d be good to have the ability to make calls on it, of course. Icing on the cake? Yes. Cake? No.
Since I saw it on the keynote, I was very disappointed that it was being differentiated from the iPod when in fact it’s really an iPod finally done right.
Should have stayed “iPod” all along.
Well, I never heard that one before…..I’m betting the iPhone is smarter then HE is….
Jim
Whatever Research Institute: ABI Research is no smart reasearcher.
BuTwo senior ABI Research analysts — wireless research director Stuart Carlaw, and principal mobile broadband analyst Philip Solis
hey people….These are smart guys.
One is a Rhode Island scholar
The other went to Oxferd.
This article is correct.
The iPhone is not a smart phone – it is a genuis phone!
The iPhone is in a category all its own.
DOH! can’t spell. “genius” phone.
What a lot of nonsense. It sounds like a microsoft press release. In fact Apple have produced a lot of excellent application software over time. iLife, iWork, iTunes – all get rave reviews.
Having used an “open system” smartphone/pda from HP/microsoft i am sure anything from apple will work much better. Try using CoPilot GPS Navigation software on an HP PDA running Windows Portable O/S – this is undoubtedly the saddest, clunkiest, least intuituve, most unreliable combination i have ever encountered. It is awful as a phone (big, slow, clunky interface) – so awful I changed to a Razr (which I also hate). Its ok as a PDA (but won’t interface to my Apple apps, or even Entourage) so I don’t even use it for contacts and appointments, and it is almost useless as a GPS Navigation tool (the battery goes flat, it loses the bluletooth connection to the GPS frequently and it hangs mysteriously on a frequent basis.)
Yuk. If this is what a smartphone has to be, give me a dumb phone from Apple any day.
Right. It is not a smart phone, but rather an intelligent design phone.
smart phone is an oxy moron, especially the ones that run Windows.
3rd-party software is all good, but it should be tested and sold by Apple, so that security won’t be jeopardized.
A rose by any other name…
The guy is right.
The Apple iPhone is not smart.
In the Real World of corporate enterprise information technology
we know that Apple products are toys — pretty looking toys —
but not real tools of commerce and industry.
No serious Fortune 500 corporate CEO is going to use an Apple
product to command his vast enterprise.
The iPhone is eye candy for Apple rabid base of fanatics but its
capabilities can’t compare with the industrial strength of Windows
and microsoft’s enterprise products designed for the Real World
of business information technology.
If you want a real useful smartphone buy a Windows-based $99 dollars
microsoft phone from Verizon. The guys at Verizon will never let a toy
from Apple to run on the best cell phone carrier network in the U.S.A.
Verizon disables Bluetooth for a good reason. American corporate
enterprises don’t like bluetooth and the viruses it can brings.
Verizon is the most Apple unfriendly cell phone network in the U.S.A.
for a very good reason. Apple is not liked by the Real World of IT and
Verizon is the best network for the Real World of IT. Corporate America
doesn’t use Apple products and Verizon will never use Apple products.
If you want to be productive get a cellphone from Verizon, and a cheap
Windows smartphone — and Windows Vista Enterprise Edition.
If you want to be unemployed and have time to waste get a contract with ATT
and let Cingular and Apple’s useless toys drive you all the way to the unemployment
office.
Real jobs and the Real World of Enterprise IT are for Windows users, exclusively.
SMARTPHONE DEFINITION: Does your phone “crash” and lock up a lot? You have a smartphone!
I have heard this from the folks SELLING the smartphones. They ALL crash, however, the MOST crash-prone are WINDOWS based smartphones, which crash far more often than the Palm OS based designs.
It is the THIRD PARTY software that does it, of course. Apple sees this, knows this, and will avoid them, of course.
IPhone SmartOwner Category.
At this point in the evolution of the cell phone no one should be thinking about third party apps. At least not untill they get the OS right, it’s like putting a sky scraper on a foundation of mashed potatoes. Cell phones as a rule suck. Apple is trying to change that by creating a new foundation and this guy is worried about the obsevation deck seat colors. Forking idiot.
>Challenging Apple to out-engineer you is a recipe for disaster.
Boy, no kidding, my blood still runs cold when I think about the interview I read some years back with the head of the iPod division. The interviewer asked him how was Apple going to handle losing all that iPod shelf space when the other players start to ‘take over’. Hehe… Dude, shouldn’t have done that!
Who cares if it a ‘smart phone’ SMART ASS!!!
The iPhone is truly the “stupid phone”. It allows even the stupidist people to do everything anyone ever wanted to do on a so-called “Smartphone”, which, as we all now know, wasn’t so “smart” after all. It was just the best they could do.
I find it all too convenient that ABI Research’s definition chooses to be so narrow.
Let us deconstruct:
“…a cellular handset…”
Okay.
“…using an open, commercial operating system…”
Um, why is this necessary to be ‘smart’? Its not. Neither open nor commercial are necessary for an OS to allow a cellular headset to be ‘smart’.
“… that supports third party applications…”
Strike two. The whole objective of being ‘smart’ is simply to have the capability be extensible.
To mandate the exact method of how to be extensible is overdefining, for what it claims is that there is only one way to proverbially “skin the cat”.
For example, it is quite clear today that the iPod is an extensible product, one that supports 3rd party applications such as external speakers, headphones, FM modulars, etc … yet none of these extensions alter or impinge upon the iPod’s internal software.
IMO, ABI Research’s definition simply smacks of trying to define a smartphone as merely a product that is open enough to offer business opportunites for 3rd Party Vendors to make money from it.
-hh
Well, that guy has a point.
I bought my current phone for exactly the reason of installing software beyond
the factory default apps. I didn’t have to buy a higher rated model just for
getting specific software features.
My Symbian phone runs Doom, a Gameboy emulator (yes, non-essential but
nice to have) and more importantly, a GPS software with all maps on the
internal memory card (read: no subscription fees for trip planning).
Why should I settle for less functionality and flexibility than that what
I’ve got right now ?
I just hope that iSync phone support in OSX does not take the same route
as third party MP3 player support after the introduction of the iPod.