iPhone 4G Design - Love It Or Hate It?

[Jellotime91]

i sure hope they managed a bigger & better battery in that puppy
if not, the crying will continue until the 5G rumors

It is. Gizmodo posted the exact details. Here's what I remember...

The battery is 15% larger, and the iPhone 3GS had a 4.51 WHr rating, while the new battery is 5.28WHr at the same voltage.

However people will ALWAYS complain about iPhone battery life. Why? Because they forget that they need to stop playing with it, and thus their battery life sucks. iPhone 3GS actually has a more than satisfactory battery life if you can put it down for a few hours like you would your blackberry. Also it's powering a 3.5" screen and there are more things to do on the iPhone OS than ANY other platform, not to mention the GPU acceleration in gaming and transitions.

*wooh*.. I know I'm ranting, but seriously, people will NEVER stop complaining. Now that the battery is removable, the number one complaint will be that the $29.99 second battery costs too much. I swear.

 

[Duvi]

It is. Gizmodo posted the exact details. Here's what I remember...

The battery is 15% larger, and the iPhone 3GS had a 4.51 WHr rating, while the new battery is 5.28WHr at the same voltage.

However people will ALWAYS complain about iPhone battery life. Why? Because they forget that they need to stop playing with it, and thus their battery life sucks. iPhone 3GS actually has a more than satisfactory battery life if you can put it down for a few hours like you would your blackberry. Also it's powering a 3.5" screen and there are more things to do on the iPhone OS than ANY other platform, not to mention the GPU acceleration in gaming and transitions.

*wooh*.. I know I'm ranting, but seriously, people will NEVER stop complaining. Now that the battery is removable, the number one complaint will be that the $49.99 second battery costs too much. I swear.

* * fixed * *

 

[Jellotime91]

* * fixed * *

LOL comedic take on it.. But no I don't believe Apple will charge $49.99. I think $39.99 would be expected because that's the price of a lot of their accessories, but honestly the iPhone is a premium product with amazing built quality, I think Apple has a right to charge $10 more for a spare battery, not because I like it but because that's just how the world works.

Ferrari parts cost more than a Chevy. That's why your Nexus One's spare battery is $25.. Jus' sayin!

 

[BLiNK]

However people will ALWAYS complain about iPhone battery life. Why? Because they forget that they need to stop playing with it, and thus their battery life sucks. iPhone 3GS actually has a more than satisfactory battery life if you can put it down for a few hours like you would your blackberry. Also it's powering a 3.5" screen and there are more things to do on the iPhone OS than ANY other platform, not to mention the GPU acceleration in gaming and transitions.

*wooh*.. I know I'm ranting, but seriously, people will NEVER stop complaining. Now that the battery is removable, the number one complaint will be that the $29.99 second battery costs too much. I swear.

man, you're good. couldn't agree anymore, really

 

[Jellotime91]

man, you're good. couldn't agree anymore, really

Hahahaha thanks. I just hate when people say that I'm illegitimate just because I have good arguments, and accuse me of being a fanboy... I try to base everything on logic and I just happen to follow Apple because I like the iPhone specifically. I don't even like the iPad but I WILL defend it when people say ridiculously incorrect things about it haha... Though people see it is "having an answer for everything" and for some reason that's a bad thing.

 

[Duvi]

LOL comedic take on it.. But no I don't believe Apple will charge $49.99. I think $39.99 would be expected because that's the price of a lot of their accessories, but honestly the iPhone is a premium product with amazing built quality, I think Apple has a right to charge $10 more for a spare battery, not because I like it but because that's just how the world works.

Ferrari parts cost more than a Chevy. That's why your Nexus One's spare battery is $25.. Jus' sayin!

so true... how much are the replacements currently on your iPhone? Hehe... just sayin'

 

[Jellotime91]

so true... how much are the replacements currently on your iPhone? Hehe... just sayin'

About $180 at a shoddy persian-owned kiosk on the street in downtown Toronto. hahaha

Can't wait till battery replacements only cost $40.. not that I have ever needed one, but I did check out the back replacement costs and they were HIGH (cause I wanted a custom silver backing).

 

[Duvi]

Never needed it either. I believe I have run out of juice two or three times -- maximum.

 

[Jellotime91]

Never needed it either. I believe I have run out of juice two or three times -- maximum.

Yeah.. I'd never need it either. I like how things are, just go to the apple store and they give you a whole new phone. Works for me!

But if your battery fails I have no doubt they will replace it for free.

 

[Ipheuria]

Battery Life and Accessories...

The bigger battery makes a whole lot of sense if you think of OS 4 with multi. Alot of people were wondering how that would impact battery life. Then there's the higher res of the screen, so they had to put in some more juice. I don't see why people complain either, I have never run out of battery power. If I did and I've been playing games all day who do I blame the battery or me for playing games all day knowing I wasn't home or near a charger? I get innovation and complaining makes companies want to do better but reasonable complaining, not whinning because you want a nuclear reactor in your pocket that charges every millenium. I also don't care how much they charge for accessories within reason, my philosophy is this, if it performs my function and I have the money I buy it, if I don't have the money I get a cheaper version or save up to buy it.

I don't know, to me that story sounds like they know so much about the Apple employee. It's like either the guy sitting beside him was watching him waiting to swipe it once he set it down somewhere or something, but the info like he was on facebook and then he set it down on the seat and left, drunk guy picks it up it just all sounds too scripted to me. Then there's the fact that Apple has done nothing which has me thinking they are in on this somehow. I guess there will be 2 more months of speculation to go LOL damn wish I could get my hands on it I wonder if Gizmodo is hiring

 

[Ipheuria]

Well I guess this may settle the point about Apple not doing anything to get the device back, if it turns out to be true. Now we all must wonder where the employee will be found??? dun dun dun dun

Apple Demands Prototype iPhone Back - Mac Rumors

The letter reads:

It has come to our attention that GIZMODO is current in possession of a device that belongs to Apple. This letter constitutes a formal request that you return the device to Apple. Please let us know where to pick up the unit.
The letter is signed by Apple's Senior Vice President & General Counsel Bruce Sewell.

 

[lordzod01]

I beleive that wether or not this is the model to be announced, it will not be far from the truth. Reading through what evidence we've been shown, this decidedly looks like a marketing deploy by Apple using someone like Gizmodo to show what we can expect.
Apple would not be asking formally for their product back, but be raising a legal suit against the people that have it. These companys spend millions to protect what they have from competators, Apple, as we all know with their copyrights is no different. This is, how you say, a publicity stunt to get people talking. keep the public interested. It will, on the other hand be interesting to see if this is the model released or if this was an earlier testing device leading Apple to WOW us with an even greater surprise.

 

[whmurray]

What's not to like?

My favorite iPhone to hold was the first one. After my great nephew finisehed with it, it was not repairable. However, I still like to take it out and hold it.

Two and three have been okay. I am sure that I will adjust to four and be very happy with it. I will buy it in a heartbeat.

My iPad will arrive next Friday. I still have the new phone, 4.0, 4.0 on the iPad, and Christmas to look forward to. Even 4.0 on my 3GS will be welcomed by the legatee.

 

[whmurray]

Well I guess this may settle the point about Apple not doing anything to get the device back, if it turns out to be true. Now we all must wonder where the employee will be found??? dun dun dun dun

Found. Found? All record of her existence may be erased.

 

[Jellotime91]

lordzod01
First of all, Apple would not sue immediately. Gizmodo had no idea how the iPhone was actually obtained be it stolen or what have you, so they did what they could with it. They were well within their legal right because Apple did not contact them with a C&D or non-disclosure agreement.

Secondly, Apple wiped the iPhone as soon as they learned it fell out of Gray Powell's possession. They obviously had no intention of showing us the real specs and details of this device, and they did NOT want to show us the new OS 4.0 features.

Thirdly, Gray Powell actually commented on the Gizmodo article, angered by their use of his name in the article. I don't believe he would have said anything if he was involved with a structured Apple leak. *However Giz has since stated they mentioned his name because they wanted to help clear it, more public attention leads companies to make more lenient decisions, they aimed to help him*

It could very well have still been a structured and intentional leak, but for these reasons I believe it was not.

Why did Apple not release the C&D order? That implies more interest than a simple "Please give it back" letter. C&D more than likely means it is a very very important product and Apple is willing to let it be known so that people will not talk about it, however the damage had already been done and there was nothing legal Apple could do about it, and a C&D would draw too much attention to it as a legal proceeding implies that this IS infact the new iPhone. My theory is that is IS the new iPhone, but Apple went with a simpler, personal letter, so that it didn't SEEM as important as it really is.

 

[Ipheuria]

Found. Found? All record of her existence may be erased.

Yes I knew him/her well until they joined Apple then they shaved their head, started speaking in a strange language and were never seen again LOL

I thought it might be a marketing gimic also but the only thing that threw me was that it seemed so finished and there's still 2 months to the launch that just seemed like such a long time the hype could very well fizzle by then. I think everyone is right, there are probably employees at apple scouring forums, twitter and blogs to see the responses and how people weigh in on the device. The only thing I'm confused about is the removable battery. The reason I say that is because I came from phones that had removable batteries and when I got the 1st gen iPhone it was such a change I hated that the battery was non-removable even though I never really removed batteries that often to begin with. Then it quickly became such a non-issue that now it's like second nature to get a phone and not even look for the battery hatch. Now they change the game again, although it's not a negative it's just funny they would make that change. I also saw alot of people are complaining about the Micro SIM slot and I don't understand why people are so resistant to change and yet always want the newest technology? You want interopperability with your old phone then keep your old SIM card. Think about it, there's a front facing camera, better camera and flash, and bigger battery just to name a few new items. They need the space so would you give up any of those for a SIM card slot?

 

[Ipheuria]

lordzod01
First of all, Apple would not sue immediately. Gizmodo had no idea how the iPhone was actually obtained be it stolen or what have you, so they did what they could with it. They were well within their legal right because Apple did not contact them with a C&D or non-disclosure agreement.

Secondly, Apple wiped the iPhone as soon as they learned it fell out of Gray Powell's possession. They obviously had no intention of showing us the real specs and details of this device, and they did NOT want to show us the new OS 4.0 features.

Thirdly, Gray Powell actually commented on the Gizmodo article, angered by their use of his name in the article. I don't believe he would have said anything if he was involved with a structured Apple leak. *However Giz has since stated they mentioned his name because they wanted to help clear it, more public attention leads companies to make more lenient decisions, they aimed to help him*

It could very well have still been a structured and intentional leak, but for these reasons I believe it was not.

Why did Apple not release the C&D order? That implies more interest than a simple "Please give it back" letter. C&D more than likely means it is a very very important product and Apple is willing to let it be known so that people will not talk about it, however the damage had already been done and there was nothing legal Apple could do about it, and a C&D would draw too much attention to it as a legal proceeding implies that this IS infact the new iPhone. My theory is that is IS the new iPhone, but Apple went with a simpler, personal letter, so that it didn't SEEM as important as it really is.

Honestly I just don't beleive that story, we are not in the know so alot of us may take the information at face value. So I'm wondering if the remote wipe was done on the phone how do they know this Gray Powell was the guy? right because the guy who got it at the bar opened the phone and saw the Facebook page open. The same guy who wanted to return it until he figured out it was a newer iPhone. The same guy whose name hasn't been released, seriously that guy seems kinda vague and shady. Then there's the fact that I've found cell phones before and your curiousity just begins to take over but yet he only looked at the Facebook page and nothing else in the phone? righttttt. Then he realized it was not the average iPhone and sold it for 5K come on he could have googled and figured out it was a prototype contact Apple and get a reward plus a free 4th gen for keeping quiet I just think the whole story is a little too shaky for me to beleive it wholeheartedly.

 

[lordzod01]

Honestly I just don't beleive that story, we are not in the know so alot of us may take the information at face value. So I'm wondering if the remote wipe was done on the phone how do they know this Gray Powell was the guy? right because the guy who got it at the bar opened the phone and saw the Facebook page open. The same guy who wanted to return it until he figured out it was a newer iPhone. The same guy whose name hasn't been released, seriously that guy seems kinda vague and shady. Then there's the fact that I've found cell phones before and your curiousity just begins to take over but yet he only looked at the Facebook page and nothing else in the phone? righttttt. Then he realized it was not the average iPhone and sold it for 5K come on he could have googled and figured out it was a prototype contact Apple and get a reward plus a free 4th gen for keeping quiet I just think the whole story is a little too shaky for me to beleive it wholeheartedly.

I agree. @Jellotime91, the three reasons you've stated don't have any basis on the fact. All the facts aren't in, (Probably we'll never know) but, what we can do is look at the present evidence and make a well structured guess at this being a publicity stunt.

As for the law coment. The law states if you find something and believe the owner can be reasonably found but you keep it for yourself, this is theft.
This is called Larceny by finding I'm sure if i know this Apples lawyers would have a field day. Just a thought.

 

[Jellotime91]

I agree. @Jellotime91, the three reasons you've stated don't have any basis on the fact. All the facts aren't in, (Probably we'll never know) but, what we can do is look at the present evidence and make a well structured guess at this being a publicity stunt.

As for the law coment. The law states if you find something and believe the owner can be reasonably found but you keep it for yourself, this is theft.
This is called Larceny by finding I'm sure if i know this Apples lawyers would have a field day. Just a thought.

Actually, all of my arguments are backed up with fact. Go read the Gizmodo articles. These are things we know.

Also, regarding the law comment, if the finder of the property attempts to return said property (which the finder DID attempt to do, to no avail, and Gizmodo knew this) and the original owner of said property chooses to do nothing about it, all is fair until the original owner decides to pay attention and take their property back. Gizmodo has lawyers as well. They know the law and they are abiding by it. They gave it back to Apple as soon as they asked.

 

[lordzod01]

Actually, all of my arguments are backed up with fact. Go read the Gizmodo articles. These are things we know.

Also, regarding the law comment, if the finder of the property attempts to return said property (which the finder DID attempt to do, to no avail, and Gizmodo knew this) and the original owner of said property chooses to do nothing about it, all is fair until the original owner decides to pay attention and take their property back. Gizmodo has lawyers as well. They know the law and they are abiding by it. They gave it back to Apple as soon as they asked.

What fact, you mean the speculation in an article on their site. LOL yea ok Fact.
They should have returned the device straight away not waited for Apple to aproach them.
The law is Larceny by finding, not Larceny by finding but i'll wait to see if someone asks for it back.
If this story is real the law was broken on day one when the device was recognised as Apple and not immediatly returned that day. Any acts taken after the device was recognised as belonging to Apple were and are plainly illegal. Unless of course this was the plan all along, which looks increasingly likely (IMOP).