- 05-22-2007, 06:14 AM #76
I'd expect many of the people who buy the iphone will be those upgrading from their ipods.
That will probably be the base apple draws from.
- 05-22-2007, 08:16 AM #77
- 05-22-2007, 09:50 AM #78
I mean, I cant take a 2 year old device like an HTC Prophet free with a contract, have "video, messaging, email, web browsing, camera, Google maps, much better PIM apps (not read-only like on the Nano), notes, calculator" and add a nano at the cost of the nano.
Simplistic, but true.
- 05-22-2007, 11:17 AM #79
I just meant that the iPhone gives you much more than just a Nano plus basic phone functionality. Sorry if I didn't express that too well.
- 05-22-2007, 11:51 AM #80
- 05-22-2007, 12:25 PM #81
I hope if the iPhone is any kind of success the next revision will split into two models -- the regular model which is basically a really cool feature phone, and an iPhone Pro, a smartphone which is open to 3rd-party software, has support for Office, that kind of thing. I understand Apple not wanting to overwhelm basic users with too many choices and have to deal with 3rd party apps screwing up the phone, etc. But right now there's not enough to get the smartphone and business crowd to come over, and I hope they intend to play to that market as well.
The old perception of Apple computers only being good for "people who are too stupid to operate a real computer" is definitely not true, but as of now it sounds like they're living up to that stereotype with the iPhone.
- 05-23-2007, 07:46 AM #82
To be successful, the iPhone must be a good PHONE first, and everything else second.
That is the key. The Treo is a okay phone, but very good PDA. Most complaints about the Treo are for phone performance.
Everything else is window dressing (albeit very purdy dressin')
- 05-23-2007, 12:32 PM #83
But coming from the most high-end of PDAs, mostly Sony's, the Treo was a big step back in some ways -- worse camera, no wi-fi, smaller screen, etc. However, with the death of Sony the idea of a combined phone/PDA was more attractive to me, and I've never regretted it. I've changed the way I use it to suit the strengths of the Treo. It should be interesting to see the iPhone because in some ways it reminds me of Sony's PDA offerings, but with a phone.
- 05-23-2007, 08:03 PM #84
- 05-24-2007, 05:22 AM #85
Interestingly, the lack of 3G support came down in fifth overall place, with 136 votes. Whether that means people really aren't bothered about it, don't think they'll use it, or thought that the other issues were even more important, isn't clear. I was anticipating the lack of 3G support, in the UK that is now used to the technology, to be a much bigger issue than it turned out to be.
Of course the iPhone does have Wifi, which will give much faster speeds than any phone network, so perhaps that's a factor.
- 05-24-2007, 09:08 AM #86
Like cable modems in the US. People tell me they don't need them b/c they don't surf the 'net much. But it's circular b/c as soon as they get a cable modem, they surf much more.
Same with 3g. You don't appreciate it until you use it for streaming TV, instant email, large file transfer, or just browsing the internet. I'd expect the same results here in the US too.
- 05-24-2007, 10:18 AM #87
- 05-24-2007, 10:33 AM #88
Shiny = good !!
- 05-24-2007, 10:35 AM #89
It does show that 3G drives data usage usage, but not to very high levels. For example, of 3G subscribers 29% access news/information at least once per month, but less than 8% do so every day. This is higher than for non-3G subscribers but still pretty low in my view. The pattern for other data services is much the same.
- 05-24-2007, 10:51 AM #90
- 05-24-2007, 12:03 PM #91
I mean, no way could you compare an EvDO ppc-6700 to a say a Moto RAZR and ever expect the same data usage. Simply put, some devices are really meant to take advantage of and use mobile broadband more than others.
The iPhone looks like a pda/mobile internet device (and is somewhat touted as one) but it lacks those 3g capabilities.
As far as whether or not they win/loose in that regard, here's my one big problem: Safari
No doubt a fine browser. Kudos for making it "mobile" (without really watering it down), but over 2.5 g? Last I recalled during the keynote it took rougly 20 secs to load the NYTimes webpage over Wifi...imagine over EDGE? I mean there are reason why full HTML browsers are not popular on devices and it has nothing to do with people not wanting them. But I'll hold final judgement for real world usage when it finally comes out. And wifi will make it easier, assuming you have Wifi access frequently (I personally hate Wifi now--since for ever 10 spots you find in the city, 9 are indivdual pay hot spots).
On a RAZR or whatever 3g reguarl flip, you don't expect a full browser--you get WAP, which is really lame anyways (talking about driving away usage; most people find WAP so useless why even bother). Then also consider Verizon's "walled garden" approach where they even block you loading Java apps or give you 5gb data limits and you have some serious hinderences to true 3g adoption.
Once cell carriers just become ISPs (instead of mobile AOLs) then we'll see 3g drive data usage. Instead of lame provider content, 3g devices act like your computer at home, we'll be there.
- 05-24-2007, 12:34 PM #92