Apple announces new "iPhone".
 

First off let me echo alot of people's first response;

:roll:

Ok. Now that's out of the way..



Who didn't see this one coming. Apple continues to play off on the iGeneration by getting an iPod and slapping a huge screen on it along with phone and PDA-like capabilities. I'll say, it looks pretty hot, but 5 or 6 hundred bux? What?

Wiki article all about it.

It being apple, I of course hate it and hope it bankrupts them :) , though that's unlikely. I can already imagine the thousands iThis and iThat loving apple zombies who'll rush to buy this as soon as they can get their hands on it. This is a nice article.

Of course, I won't disagree, it's very high tech and has some pretty attractive features, but some other manufacture is very likely to create an identical device (or may even have one out, but nobody gets press like apple), that is either comparable in features or greater, and lacks so much propietory-ness, and you can pretty much bet that it's going to cost less =/. Though I guess the downside of that is that you won't be able to have the "apple user experience".

Discuss.

[edit] Steve Jobs' presentation: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12

[edit] In before cless/killmoms - I know I'm very biased against apple. Sorry, don't mind me ~

I like Apple's design philosophy. I like the creativity that goes into their interfaces. But when Steve Jobs flashed the presentation slide that said 200 patents my enthusiasm for the iPhone went out the door.

Too bad one of those patents didn't include the name of iPhone....

The iPhone is nothing new, just like the iPod video is nothing new. Companies have already had what they have had long before they have had it, and with many of the same features (although I don't think they included 8 gigs of hard disk space).

I just don't see the point of this. One can surely buy a decent mobile phone for 100 U.S.D. And an 8 gig iPod nano for 250. That's 350 U.S.D. Far less than the 500 to 600 U.S.D. And pictures? Well, you can grab a camera that has somewhat better quality for another 100 U.S.D. So right there, you have paid less for the three combined (and some of those things of better quality) than the iPhone.

That isn't even going into my philosphy of 'your world consisting of Mp3 players should nto be limited to Apple' and 'mobie phones are there for calling and sending text messages'. If you go with this mentality of mine, you can possibly get all of that stuff for 300 U.S.D.

I think they've done a fantastic job of working together a lot of really decent features and wrapping them up in a very pretty manner. Having it sense what direction you're holding it, the proximity sensor for turning off the screen and music when you're talking on the phone, the multi-touch screen interface...they're doing something right. Obviously the price is an issue, plus the fact that Cingular has exclusive distribution rights for an undisclosed (I think?) period of time means that anyone on the other networks is basically screwed (especially those of us not on a gsm network). Apple typically unveils their new toys with a fairly hefty price tag attached, and the price works itself down from there. I'm sure the iPhone will do fine once it can get past the Cisco hurdle. And it will probably open up new ideas for all the competing companies, as well. All in all, I don't think it's a bad thing that it's coming out.

I think it's great. I don't agree with mortis' argument. Yes, it does cost more than buying the three--but that makes sense. It's the same reason why a small cell phone costs more than a comparably featured large one. Since I keep a bunch of stuff in my pockets it's difficult to carry a cell phone and my MP3 player around--let alone a camera. It means I get less use out of them because I don't carry them around all of the time--unlike my cell phone. Having them in one thing is a good idea... although, I haven't seen cell phone camera quality for years... so I don't know if it's decent yet. If it is it would be decent to have a camera... but mostly I've been interested in _well done_ MP3/phone integration. I know it has been done before... but, I hadn't seen any that seemed great.

Thanks for the '10 thing to hate' article. The only things that really bother me are 2 and 4. I remember Engadget running a story that there was speculation of two batteries: one for the phone and the other for the MP3 player. If it's _really_ only 5 hours of phone that would be bad... especially if I can't use my phone because I've been listening to too much music. I also don't care about the internet/texting/video features since... doing them on such a small device isn't good. What I really want is just MP3/Phone... the touch screen is a bad move for that. Especially since I dial based on feeling most of the time and not looking. Also... I would never spend that much.

But, it's great news because it is such big news. Because of Apple lots of other companies started investing more into MP3 players and it helped innovation. I am usually a generation behind in technology... my first DAP was an MP3 CD player... followed by this Christmas' acquisition of my sister's old iPod mini. So, I am looking forward to be able to get an cheap MP3 player / phone whenever I need a new phone in a few years.

Nowadays, they not only have phones that play music, but videos and record movies as well. Quality wise...it's OK. In truth, getting an iPod nano and a mobile phone/camera combination is also a good, seemingly cheaper, alternative for those who don't want to have to be running around with too many things.


So yes, I see your point. The thing is though, for an iPhone, the camera's quality seems rather weak. Like the photos you take won't be that great anyway and if you want a decent one, you'll still need a camera. Or get a better mobile phone/camera combination and listen to an iPod nano instead (yeah, made that suggestion a second time!)

I hope they go broke as well, but there's too many morons that actually buy that shit.

and lol@battery life

$500-$600 for a phone with a 2 year contract is nuts. Especially because you're going to be hit with not only the phone plan, but a data plan as well. Otherwise, you won't get to use %80 of the phone's features.

So let's see...

I just hope they transfer the touchscreen interface and wide screen to the 6th Gen iPod so I can play with that.

mortis, you will also need a decent camera... but the thing is having a camera always at the ready. But, you won't be able to carry around your nice SLR camera all of the time and for many situations a phone is good enough. I think it also allows you to buy a better digital camera since one reason I have a compact is so I can carry it around more easily for pedestrian events. I am making these suggestions without thought of price--anyone who buys it is insane or incredibly rich (as Matt shows). But prices will come down.

Cam, I don't understand. I can see you not wanting it... or thinking it's not a good deal. But, do you not think that having Apple in the market leads to greater innovation and other good things? I think the iPhone is a good step forward. There is a problem with people who think Apple is perfect and will buy anything by them--but, I don't understand your view any better...

COWON has something like that in korea (probably won't come to america for several months to a year), it's a touch screen PMP. Like the A2, but with windows CE if I recall. edit: it's called the Q5

gren: apple annoys me with their retarded gimmicks. they tend to use lower quality hardware and overcharge on it. and they support inferior apple lossless, but not flac, even despite the fact that the FLAC website lists a comparison that shows flac is better overall than any other lossless codec. people shouldn't have to void their warranties with rockbox to get flac support.

I just like how fast Cisco sued Apple for using their trademark.

Well, Apple was negotiating with Cisco over using the iPhone name for weeks before Apple showed off the iPhone. Which could be seen as Apple admitting that they acknowledge Cisco as the owner. Then Apple went and used it, announcing the new iPhone before a deal was signed and made. So obviously Cisco is going to sue them.

I think Cisco does have a valid reason to do it. They (and previously Infogear before Cisco purchased them) have been using the iPhone label since the early 90s. For the past couple years Linksys has been marketing and producing various iPhone products as well. What Cisco plans to do with their iPhone is different than what Apple plans to do with theirs. This is only going to lead to confusion for consumers and lost sales for either Apple or Cisco.

Apple could of used another name. They have used names other than i<insert name here> for some of their products. Hell, they could of even used something like Icell or something if they REALLY needed the I<shit> thing that badly. The fact they were negotiating a deal with Cisco over using it kind of proves that they used it knowing that it belonged to Cisco, like I said earlier in the post.

I will buy one, because that's the sexiest UI I've ever seen in my life and it will work seamlessly with my Mac. You all already knew that. And I don't care what you think. As usual, Apple pioneers in UI and design, which is something that people who only look at "stats/$" don't seem to care about.

Also, this is not the only iPhone. It's just the first. Much like the iPod, there will likely be downscaled models that cost less. Much like the iPod, they are introducing it as a luxury gadget first, letting the early adopters pick it up and lead the way.

So does this also mean that like the iPod there will be a new one every 3 months that has one more feature that will make the older ones crap?

Considering that there haven't been any really new iPods at all in the last 3 months, I'd consider that argument moot. Heck, the larger capacity 5th generation iPods that came out in the fall actually came with a software update that gave the same abilities to 5th gen iPods that had already been sold for the previous 6 months.

So, I mean, yes, once there's a 6th generation touch-screen iPod (like the iPhone without the phone part), I guess you'll be right. However, I'd say that's less likely to happen here. Apple can easily deliver new functionality via software updates, and new programs for the iPhone will be available for purchase (in the iTunes Store I'd wager). The iPod, at least in terms of major functionality, has always been hardware limited. Clearly the iPhone is a more extendable platform (to a point).

Also, you say it like as soon as Apple releases a new iPod, the previous ones become unusable, which is nonsense. If a device doesn't do everything you want it to yet, don't buy it. If it does, buy it and enjoy it. New things with new abilities will always come out, if you let that dictate your technology purchases you'll never buy anything at all. I still use and enjoy my 3-year-old 3rd gen, touch-button, 20GB iPod with its monochrome screen (though I will be replacing its battery for $40 pretty soon). Know why? Because I bought it based on the capabilities it had at the time. Yes, the newer ones do more, but that's okay.

It looks extremely great and since my current cellphone kinda sucks and I don't have a good MP3 player either, I might get it maybe. But it seems to be pretty expensive, so I don't know. Maybe I will wait for a couple of months until the price is dropping (I will do the same with the PS3 btw)

Trademark dispute... More info about why Apple is using iPhone without making a deal with Cisco.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Burnette/?p=236

If that article is correct, I'm really impressed with Apple's smart legal team. That's a case that they can win.

Fixed like fucking hell.

Posting to say I believe this is the dumbest thing that will ever be released in 2007. Costs just as much as the PS3, only it's much more useless. How that's possible is beyond me. :(

I dunno, the AppleTV device could be in pretty good running for that title, too.

Agreed on that count. I could just buy a mini with Front Row and do all the same stuff, plus use whatever codecs I wanted.

Wow just a moment dude did you just imply that PS3 is going to be useless? Well I dunno about iPhones, sure, it is a bit expensive, but it looks very good (better than all the other cellphones I know) and it will be pretty multifunctional, too.

I think ''good'' is exactly what it doesn't look like. I would've really expected something better from Apple, because iPhone looks like it was made in Poland. I mean, maybe it's just me, but I couldn't take people with a phone like that seriously. The design looks like it's aimed at high-schoolers, but the price would be more appropriate for doctors or lawyers.

Well yeah, "good" is relative, but in general, I think it has a modern and fashionable design, I mean, it is relatively flat and the color is nice as well.

Like a previous person posted, I am bothered by all of the patents. Software patents don't mix with me very well. However, I wonder what Apple is going to do about this:

http://www.phonegg.com/FIC/Neo1973/FIC-Neo1973.html

It runs Linux and, from what I read, it's going to have an apt-get sort of system. The downsides:

Very little hard drive space compared to iPhone
No support for providers using CDMA ( Sprint, I'm looking at you )
Pricey. What the hell are they thinking?

So far, those are my only problems with it. I couldn't care less about Apple's patented "pinching" of the screen or the automatic landscape detection.

I suppose but you'd need a good external harddrive to make the most of it and sucks to be you if you're trying to run mkv or ogm or anything with fancy subtitles. You'd have to fall in to a minority to be affected by that but to say the least, OSX's video capabilities are limited compared to Windows.

Can't wait until someone comes out with the same thing minus a phone and uses UMS so you don't have to use a bullshit program like iTunes or whatever the fuck to transfer media and excellent media type support and at least 30 gigs. I'd be more inclined to pay at the least 400 bucks for that.