This thread (and the article itself) seems to hold some rational people so I would like to pose some thoughts here.
First off, I do agree. This is a good article. I particularly like the format andserved well to bring up the various views and aspects.
To address the vaporware comment in the article, I have to say that a different word probably should have been used. Perhaps asmall knit-picking point but by choosing to call the iPhone vaporware you are insinuating that it will never arrive, OR at the very least, if it does it will not hold all of the features as announced. I have every bit of confidence that Apple will deliver this product and it will arrive delivering above and beyond our expectations as of today.
No comment on my confidence in Palm.
Michael Ducker says flashy graphics do not make a (good) UI. He says, "A UI iis defined by the ease of navigating between forms and the ability to quickly find your information on the display. And for the bulk of the applications, I saw very little differences between Palm OS and Apple's UI"
A UI is how the user interacts with a device/application. Apple has enabled the user to interact with this iPhone device in an unheard of manner. This is accomplished through Apple's designs in hardware (ie: the hundreds of patents published and revealed at places like Macsimumnews.com). In addition, Apple has made it is easy to get around and access the differing features of the apps on the hardware. AND they make it easy to follow (for example, the flashy sliding in and out of various facets of an application), and consequently learn. This is accomplished through Apple's designs in the software (ie: flashy animations).
As an Interactive Designer, I hold considerable more knowledge of this subject than most here. But even so...
To speak of and reference static images in referring to a user interface is to ignore the fact that the UI is there to allow you to "INTERACT" with the phone. So it is my opinion that it is Apple's flashy graphics that make a good UI.
Oh, one more comment in regards to the article. I differ in the opinion that the iPhone is not a smartphone platform yet. Bear in mind that the iPod, along with iTunes and the iTS is an obvious platform. Continuing with that thought, we now have the introduction of the iPhone upon us in about 4 or 5 months. We have to recognize the fact that their IS ALREADY a huge supporting community of add ons. Peripherals that are part of the iPhone platform such as battery add-ons that can be quickly added or plugged in for extra power or charging, obvious hardware accessories that are currently available for the iPod like the camera connector and iPod Radio Remote, developers making games for purchase, content up the wazoo like songs, videos, movies, tv shows, podcasts, audiobooks, PDF content, iTunes U and its integration with Blackboard, WebCT, and Sakai and others. The iPhone is actually the only product, that I know of, where an entire platform was built up in various aspects with various materials BEFORE the thing is even released.