MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

People want this thing to fail and succeed. I can't wait till it comes out-- it's gonna' be sharp.

"After 30 seconds, I was already typing faster with the iPhone than I ever have with any other phone. I suspect that true e-mail demons will need to adapt to the lack of tactile feedback, though."

Wasn't there some Finn sayin' sumpin about assured lousy typing on virtual keyboards?

Andy is a great columnist, and if he liked it, I am sold. But I definitely do NOT wish to touch his robe.


MDN Magic Word: Respect
As is "Much respect." Ali G

You guys think Apple announced the iPhone now to iron out any potential problems before June?

I don't understand why they are including a full version of OS X 10.5 Leopard, taking up "less than 500MB" (but presumably more than 400), if there isn't going to be rampant third party software development. Why include the whole OS if it's not to let everyone develop for it? If they are going to keep such a tight rein on software why not strip out everything that the apps aren't going to need. If a future app requires some code that isn't included by default, Apple uses their tight leash to include the needed OS code in that individual app's installer. Personally I'd like to keep a lot of space for music, so I doubt I would ever get more than 100MB of apps. If that requires 400-500MB of OS support, there is something wrong. I think there is something here I am missing, possibly because Apple isn't telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

It sounds like Apple waited until it was 95% confident about the June release, before making the announcement and showing the product. The UI would be the hardest part to get right, and it sounds like it already works perfectly. If all Apple needs to do is finish development and testing of a few apps, that's good news.

Hopefully, all the "analysts" will stop saying that the iPhone does not have a keyboard. According to someone who actually got to try it, it's "huge improvement over the mechanical thumbpads."

Jay,

I envison apps made by Apple to be sold for the phone first, and then it might open up to some approved developers later on... Like with the iPod... We'll see...

David

My only debate about the iPhone is whether I should pony up and spend $599 at the initial release OR hold off a bit for revision 2.0 at a lower price.

There is no doubt, this thing is overpriced and will come down sharply after the early adopters and Apple fans get milked. I mean sheesh, even if todays report about Apple making a 50% profit on these things is off by 10% or so, they are still making a HUGE profit.

I really want one, but $599 is not an easy purchase for my financial situation. I could do it, but I would hate to have the more advanced 3G version at $349 come out six months later.

Anyone know what Apple's typical revision 2.0 timespan is?

No James.

I know, as do most who have read and heard about the matter, Apple, Inc. wanted to be the first to introduce this product rather than suffer the woes of premature exposure resulting from leaks at the FCC. The FCC process will require at least two months of lab scrutiny before it is approved by the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau.

Apple was right to introduce the phone as they did. That iPhone will improve with each iteration is bankable.

I also think Apple has developed OS X Mobile that will find it's way into future iPod models.

June release. Hmmmmmm, WWDC anyone? I bet that June will also see Leopard ship as well.

Isaih: why not wait? i mean, it won't kill you or me to wait for iPhone 2.0 to come out. it's the kind of phone i've been waiting for, but that's a lot of money, for sure. i can use my crap phone longer.

So much for the FUD about the inferiority of the touchscreen interface for texting. The lying "pundits" and "anal-ists" are exposed yet again doing their obsessive compulsive Apple bashing.

The first thing I want to do is text Ballmer and tell him why he and his company suck while typing it on the virtual keyboard of the iPhone, which it doesn't have, according to his Uncle FUDsterness.

Andy Ihnatko is a hoot. Check out his interview immediately after the Stevenote on the MacBreak video podcast.

There are a few reasons Apple launched now, but it was basically for the same reason they launched AppleTV in advance:

Marketing 101

The quick and dirty is this - you launch a new product into a new market you do not yet currently play in, that contains little risk in reducing any current product sales.

This does several things:
1. Slows competitive product sales. "Oh, I was going to purchase a Blackberry, but I can wait."

2. Due to #1, this starts to build pent-up demand when the product does launch.

3. More free press and specualtion during the time from pre-announcing to launching. Then another boost of free press once the product starts shipping. Money can't buy this much press... well it can, but this is simply a smarter way to get it for free.

4. FCC and Cingular: This point is Apple-specific, but Apple requires total secrecy in developing products. With this device, the FCC would have blown the products cover, so a pre-launch was necessary. Then their is Cingular, and Apple knows there is no way to control their pie-holes, so you pre-announce before some tech at Cingular does it for you.

There you go.

I bet I know why Apple went with OS X: to remove its dependence on PortalPlayer (now owned my nVidia) with its current iPods. OS X is far more portable than the proprietary OS the current iPods run in combination with the PortalPlayer hardware. OS X can run on almost anything.

> The quick and dirty is this - you launch a new product into a new market you do not yet currently play in, that contains little risk in reducing any current product sales.

Your comments are mostly true, except that Apple called the iPhone the best iPod it has ever made. There will no doubt be a video iPod (with a hard drive) using the same touch screen technology. But Apple will probably not release such a product until iPhone is out the door (to avoid stealing attention and sales from iPhone). So there is significant risk that iPod sales will be reduced this quarter and next quarter. However, Apple timed this very well, since any iPod lull will be offset (at least during the April-June quarter) by a Mac salses surge caused by the release of Leopard (with new Macs and iLife/iWork).

"You guys think Apple announced the iPhone now to iron out any potential problems before June?"

No they released it because I doubt the people at the FCC care as much about Apples penchant for secrecy as Apple does.
Takes a few months for FCC approval. Likely they don't alllow approval unless the product is actually SHOWN to the agency.

Perhaps a welcomed side effect of having to do this however is that they are certainly hearing plenty of feedback via the intartubes and the blaghosphere about what people want it to do (3G, iTunes ringtones) and what they dont want it to do (Cingular lock-in). Perhaps this gives them time to make 'adjustments'.

"I noticed that the iPhone's pre-release browser was missing some plug-ins. I asked if Real and Macromedia et al. would be writing media plug-ins for the iPhone's Web browser, and was told that no, the browser would ship with plug-ins, but Apple would be writing them all in-house."

Does that mean no Flash or what?

So sometime before June Leopard should appear on the Mac. So this would also explain the wait until June. Leopard isn't done yet so there other leopard apps they are going to load on the iphone probably isn't done yet either.

So sometime before June Leopard should appear on the Mac

Aw gee, I was kinda hoping it would be out about mid-March.

@ R2
Does that mean no Flash or what?

I doubt that it means no Flash. Apparently Apple will be writing (proofing?) the plug-ins. I think it means that if you thought the Mac was a vertically oriented product you should call the iPhone the "Plumb".

*wipes tear from eye*

You guys think Apple announced the iPhone now to iron out any potential problems before June?

Steve said in the keynote he wanted to announce it before the FCC did!

COULD SOMEONE PLEASE POST THIS ON FARK!

Maybe a headline that says "iPhone reviewed by somone...who...actually...used it!"
or something witty

I tried and my account is acting all weird and it won't let me.
=[

It would be excellent for Apple to get this out to the masses. Believe me, Fark already has a bunch of PC weenies that have been trying their hardest to bash it...

Am I the only one here who has noticed one critical flaw that sure as hell better be included in the final iPhone...VIBRATION!

I bet the price will DROP by the time it comes out. I have NO USE for this iPhone but I'll wager the price drops prior to release. It's WAY TOO expensive at it's current price point IMHO. Neat device, too expensive.

Watch!

"which runs Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard"

I believe someone owes me a coke.

Cool, maybe it will have an automatic peanut-butter sandwich maker built in ...and iChat AV!

Hey, about student discounts?

Steve explicitly stated that it runs OS X, not Mac OS X... There's a big difference in there...

http://daringfireball.net/2007/01/os_x

Just a coke, ChrissyOne? A little Jack or Maker's in there?

Help me out here,

lot of insight in these post, from people who know alot more than I do!!

Does anyone think that the iPhone will have VOIP ??

I travel overseas 70% of the time, and cingular at 26 cents a minute, doesnt cut it, (will get one any way)

Has anyone heard anything??

Isaih, you wrote:

"My only debate about the iPhone is whether I should pony up and spend $599 at the initial release OR hold off a bit for revision 2.0 at a lower price.

"There is no doubt, this thing is overpriced and will come down sharply after the early adopters and Apple fans get milked. I mean sheesh, even if todays report about Apple making a 50% profit on these things is off by 10% or so, they are still making a HUGE profit."


Tell me, Isaih, how much do you think Apple spent on the development of the iPhone? Did you factor that into your statement above? In his address, Steve Jobs told the audience that the company has had the iPhone under development for the past 2 1/2 years. But reading an old Mac The Knife column (my favorite rumor monger ever!!) about 5 years ago, I recall him saying that Apple had set up an internal Skunk Works specifically to research and develop new gadgets like the iPhone, based on the early success of the iPod.

My hunch is that someday, the story may emerge on the hundreds of millions of dollars spent by Apple to develop the iPhone. Add to that the millions the company will spend in marketing this product internationally over the next several years, licensing fees for technologies, the money spent to develop and win over 200 patents related to the iPhone, manufacturing costs and myriad other costs, including fees and royalties to Cingular and other carriers, and you have an outlay that may dwarf anything the company has ever invested on any product before it.

So tell me again, Isaih, that you think Apple has no right to recoup its investment?

Initially, the cost may be high for someone like you. But in an industry as competitive as the wireless telephone industry, not to mention consumer products, the competitive pressures are such that market forces will bring down the cost of the iPhone over time. If you recall, think of the opening price for the original iPod, and consider the cost of an iPod Nano or Shuffle today. Once Apple sells several million copies of iPhone, it's inevitable that the price will come down.

If you don't like the price, wait. But understand, Apple is a BUSINESS, and exists to make money for its stockholders first. I hope you understand the dynamics of what Apple has had to do to create a groundbreaking new product. If the company was a me-too manufacturer like Dell, which it is not, you might see a lower price sooner. But the iPhone is like no other product of its kind. I for one won't blink at the thought of buying one. And once you play with your first iPhone, you might just change your tune.

Apple deserves to reap the rewards of the risks and investments they took to create this amazing device. I hope now that you will understand why, Isaih.

M$ announced their new phone called the Zone today. It has a WiFi client that doesn't really let you do much, actually. The Zone will feature a fullle version of Vista, Outlook, and IE 7.1. Steve "Abby-Normal" Ballmer was quoted as saying " Why should you be free of viruses just because you are on the road?" Symentec says it will offer a Space Invaders interface to it's anti-virus soiftware just for the Zone. Peter Norton was quated as saying "This way people can stay entertained as they blast the wireless mal-ware from their phone."
In an unrelated story Dr. Barry Sears has filed suity against M$. Dr. Sears claims M$ is using his trademark to market crap too.

VOIP is inevitable, industry-disruptive and a family-breaker (for those who get fired). I'm not holding my breath for it, but I want it bad.

VoIP Over WiFi WILL Disrupt the Cellular Industry:

My guess if that the complete disruption of this industry will take five years....

•
•
•
</pre>
WiFi support in mobile phones will shift the balance of power from the big wireless operators to the cellphone hardware and software makers. Phones will be purchased independently of calling plans just as computers are purchased independent of Internet connectivity arrangements.  Coupons for access may be included with phones instead of phones being included with calling plans.  Why? Because voice calling will be too cheap to meter and hardware will still cost something.

I'll get it right someday.

Will I be able to use "the best iPod ever" on a plane?

Oh and I'm tired of all this "there will be no third-party iPhone applications" garbage. The iPod is just as "closed" of a system and there are tons of third-party applications for it, such as ones that let you play video on the iPod nano for example. Sure, none of them will exist with Apple's blessing, but they'll certainly still be there. I can't wait till hackers figure out a way to put Skype on it.

Bernard Flaptool,

To respond to your long winded defense of Apple's iPhone price..

Of course I think Apple has a right to recoup on it's investment, and of course I understand that large sums of money went into the development of iPhone.. But I also understand that Apple operates on some of the highest profit margins of any tech company in existence. Historically, it is not uncommon for Apple to operate in the 40% profit margin range. If you think iPhone is any different you are sorely mistaken..

I have no idea how much was spent on developing iPhone, but just for kicks, lets use your example of several hundred million..

Steve Jobs said their goal is 10 million iPhones in year one. 10 million iPhones equates to 5 billion in total revenue, which equates to roughly 2.5 billion in profit. If the iPhone cost 200 million to develop, they would have recouped development costs in it's first month of sales..

So yes, I honestly do believe that the iPhone is extremely overpriced and there is no doubt in my mind that it could be sold for considerably less and Apple would still make a handsome profit.

You know. the technologies in iPhone already existed, OSX, Safari web browser, mail, iPod, wifi, edge, etc.. etc.., Apples innovations with the iPhone were about taking pre-exisitng technologies and making them more accesible and easy to use via a brand new user interface.

Bernard,

One more example of how Apple is milking the early adopters..

4gb iPod nano = $199
8gb iPod nano = $249

$50 difference

4gb iPhone = $499
8gb iPhone - $599

$100 difference

Both examples are the same product with different stoarage capacities, so why does 8gb of flash memory cost $100 more in a phone when it only costs $50 more in an iPod?

Isaih wrote:

"4gb iPod nano = $199
8gb iPod nano = $249

$50 difference

4gb iPhone = $499
8gb iPhone - $599

$100 difference

Both examples are the same product with different stoarage capacities, so why does 8gb of flash memory cost $100 more in a phone when it only costs $50 more in an iPod?"

Big difference Isaih!

The 8gb iPod nano has another iPod model 30gb iPod at $249 "above" it in the line up (in terms of capacity).

Apple couldn't price the 8gb nano at a higher price than the 30gb iPod!

So maybe the 8gb nano SHOULD be $100 more, but they take a hit on the price?

See the MDN article:

http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/12351/

In this article, the analyst estimates that the margin on the 4gb is BIGGER than the margin on the 8gb iPhone. This supports the arguement that the 8gb flash costs more than the $100 more that Apple is charging (as an anology, 2gb memory chips cost more than double 1gb chips!)

As the 8gb iPhone currently the "top of the range" in terms of capacity, this allows Apple to charge a price more reflective of the price difference between the flash storage costs they are charged. Even STILL they don't make up the whole amount! If they did, then as there is NO DIFFERENCE between the 4gb and 8gb iPhone internally EXCEPT for the flash memory, then if the $100 was price gouging (or MILKING in your words), then they would be making a BETTER margin on the 8gb iPhone.

my 2 cents,

Luke

@Less is more. crikey mate, i think you should reconsider your handle to -

Bigger is better</pre>

MDN magic word "out" as in that almost knocked me out.

Thanks Andy, I hope Tero K- whatever reads this and then shuts the fcuk up.

But where is Peter!?

He SWORE black and blue that this phone did NOT run Mac OS X (or OS X - he started getting into semantics).

Maybe he can't post, because he is trying so hard to get the foot out of his mouth!



Luke

Do people here have reasonable incomes? I understand budget constraints-- I'm a grad student myself. But so many people seem to be high schoolers complaining that this'll eat into their pizza money or something. Like it and affor it-- buy it! If not, move on. Sheesh.

Luke, you need to re-think your math..

the article which you linked to suggests that total costs for the 4gb iPhone is $245 while the 8gb is $280. That's a $35 difference.. So your theory is wrong.

Anyway you look at it, the iPhone has at least a 40-45% profit margin. Apple will make an extremely healthy profit on each unit sold.

Cubert,

I wouldn't ruin the taste of Makers with Coke...

MW/quality. As in never ruin a quality bourbon with anything.

This guy should lose his license to report with "which runs Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard"....DUH!


Why do you think it will come out in June? Hardware? No! The bugs need to be worked out in Leopard.


Stabilize Leopard, iPhone will come sooner than later.

The only problem Apple will have is making enough of these things to keep up with demand.

I agree Jerry T, but not everyone sees it my (and your) way.

Cheers! I'll be having a few Makers' on the rocks this weekend.

The software is the key. hehehe