Despite all the hype, the response to the iPhone in Europe isn't nearly like it was in the U.S. Is T-Mobile happy with 10 thousand units sold in Germany on the first day?!
I hope Apple knows, but Europe is a different market. Mobile telephony was born here. There are several service providers, with competitive plans. People here live and breathe cellphones. They unlock phones. And there is a huge choice of devices. Oh, and the iPhone plans are horribly expensive.
Also, saying that the iPod doesn't enjoy a monopoly like in the U.S. (arguably an important factor in the iPhone's success) would be a huge understatement. The iPod's market share in Germany "hit a high" of around 28% in 2007: nowhere close to U.S. figures.
I wonder if Apple wants the iPhone to be a rock star in Europe, or just a device with respectable sales. In the former case, the company may soon be forced to go back to the drawing board and rethink its European iPhone strategy.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Maybe this iPhone will be an U.S. thing after all?
Thursday, November 08, 2007
Behind the rumors: is it an iPhone Pro, or a Mac touch?
According to recent rumors, "Asus is helping Apple build a Tablet PC." This comes only a few weeks after a rumor suggesting the return of the Newton handheld computer.
I strongly believe that (a) a new device is coming indeed, and (b) it will sport a MultiTouch interface.
But is it going to be an extended iPod touch/iPhone, or will it be a modified Mac? I think both are possible. Here's what I think about these two (not mutually exclusive) scenarios.
Mac touch
Tablet PCs have failed only because they were horrendously badly executed, and were saddled with ridiculous ideas. No usable keyboard? Why the hell would anyone want to interact with a computer via handwriting? Isn't typing demonstrably faster? Hello?
That doesn't mean, however, that a tablet PC is inherently a bad idea. On the contrary: at worst, eliminating a physical keyboard could easily save space and cost, ushering in a new class of unexpensive, miniaturized PCs. At best, a new set of thoughful metaphors could emerge, with several advantages over traditional input mechanisms.
The iPhone has shown us all that Apple gets it. The iPhone interface features direct manipulation metaphors that arguably beat everything else out there, including the mouse and the trackball. It can also simulate a keyboard, though the lack of physical feedback is a disadvantage. (Apple may be working on a solution there: I sure hope they are.)
How difficult would it be for Apple to modify Mac OS X in order to accommodate a MultiTouch user interface, complete with a usable onscreen keyboard? A stylus would probably be included for precision work, but most tasks could be achieved using your fingers. Just imagine your daily work on a Mac, and imagine using your fingers instead of the mouse: I'm hard-pressed to find anything that would no longer be doable. (Things like right-clicking would need clever substitutes, though.)
It can be argued whether or not "direct manipulation" of objects on the screen would be better than using a pointing device on a different surface. However, some new metaphors, borrowed from the iPhone and from trackpads of Apple's laptops, could definitely provide a superior experience. Think about two-finger scrolling, page-turning gestures, or the zooming "pinch": these certainly beat scroll arrows or "next page" buttons. And yet further multi-finger gestures could be born, something that no mouse could ever accommodate. (And besides, even single-finger gestures are much easier and more natural than their mouse equivalents: operating a mouse is not that easy; we've just all gotten used to it.)
Specs: If Apple believes the "Mac touch" to be a potentially superior device, one that would one day supplant both the desktop and the notebook form factors, shipping large and powerful configurations would make a lot of sense. If Apple only views the "touch" as a companion device, whose main selling point is its miniaturization, then obviously, we're only talking about smaller configurations. Maybe there would be a "Pro" class, even, featuring different storage and size options.
There's a minimum screen size below which the device would be hard to use; thus I don't think we would see a Mac touch with a screen smaller than 8" or maybe even 10". Larger configurations could be just about any size, even 20", though I would be surprised if Apple actually shipped such a huge Mac touch at the device's debut.
The small version(s) would definitely represent a breakthrough in miniaturization, so it's questionable whether they would even feature optical drives. I imagine a very thin form factor, dominated by a huge screen, one or two buttons, speakers, a microphone, and Bluetooth, WiFi, Ethernet, USB and FireWire interfaces. It would definitely use batteries. As for internal storage, smaller models could avoid hard disks and use flash memory; a larger (Pro?) family could perhaps use both (as well as an optical drive).
Pros*: Compatible with existing Mac; full-featured; no need for Apple to port OS or apps
Cons*: Form factor too large for some uses; no real breakthrough in miniaturization; probably costly
iPhone Pro/Newton
I've always yearned for a time when miniaturization would endow a handheld device with the full functionality of a computer. Then I realized that it's not as simple as that. In order to be successful and usable, a tiny computer needs a different, well thought out user interface – it can't just run the OS of its full-sized siblings.
This is why I was so ecstatic about the birth of a new platform this January. Apple's handheld OS X and other related technologies have proven themselves to work beautifully, and they are bound to make their way into other products. Since then, they have already given birth to the iPod touch: a somewhat premature development in my opinion, but a necessary one to keep the freshness of the iPod brand (I'd wager heavily that most iPod sales come from the nano and maybe the classic.)
What if Apple were to release a similar, though somewhat larger device, one that could function as a supercharged PDA and/or a stripped-down Mac?
After all, most of the work is already done. The technology is there, all Apple needs to do is build a larger device, write some additional apps (or port some existing apps over to it), and voilà: there's your new Newton, powered by iPhone technologies (perhaps without the phone part, though)!
As an aside: I'm relieved that my iPhone predictions are turning out to be overly pessimistic in light of the SDK that Apple announced. We still don't know from Steve Jobs' musings how open the platform is going to get, or how smart Apple itself is going to make the phone – will it sprout a clipboard any time soon, for example –, but at least, the phone will further tap into the huge potential of having OS X running on a handheld device. However, I'm still not sure if the iPhone will ever be intended to become a true PDA or handheld computer. I think Apple will strive to keep simplicity as one of its main virtues. So, there may be room for a more powerful iPhone-like device in Apple's product matrix.
Specs: This would be a handheld device, though a somewhat larger one than the iPhone. It would expand on the capabilities and features of the iPhone – or of the iPod touch. (It's a good question whether it would double as a cellphone: such a functionality would certainly be welcome, especially for internet access, but having to commit to a monthly plan would also turn away some potential users. Maybe two versions would emerge, one with, and one without a phone.)
It would probably ship with enhanced versions of iPhone apps, as well as additional ones written by Apple. All in all, it would be a new-ish platform; an evolutionary development over the iPhone, but perhaps consummating the revoution it started.
Bluetooth, WiFi, flash memory would be a given, anything else (Ethernet, USB, etc.) could be anyone's guess.
Pros*: Smaller form factor; possible cellphone functionality; potentially lower price
Cons*: Incompatible with Mac software; still not a full-blown computer; yet another platform for Apple to support, and for third parties to develop for
* Pros and cons: a comparison between the two speculative scenarios.
Wednesday, October 03, 2007
Quo vadis, iPhone?
People all over the web are giving Apple hell for breaking unauthorized and unsupported third-party iPhone hacks with its 1.1 software update. There are two types of these hacks: ones enabling the iPhone to be used with any SIM card; and others which just let users install third-party apps on the device. The former directly hurt Apple and AT&T, therefore Apple is actively trying to prevent these hacks. The latter, however, don't do much harm, thus Apple doesn't go out of its way to break them. Break them it does, nevertheless, prompting liberation movements to spring up and demand the franchisement of the iPhone from the evil tyranny of Apple. What could be more ridiculous than that?
Some of these critics jump to the conclusion that Apple doesn't get the importance of third-party applications. Well, chance may have it that Apple doesn't plan to ever allow third-party apps on the iPhone, but we don't know that.
I'm more inclined to believe that Apple wants to do it right.
There's a common sentiment out there that accuses Apple of some sort of haughty elitism. Wil Shipley put it this way:
I know Steve Jobs; he's actually amazingly like my old business partner Mike Matas. They both love closed systems, for a simple reason -- they both know they're smarter than anyone else on the planet, and they don't need anyone else mucking up their systems. Steve would rather have no third parties for Mac OS X if he could get away with it -- Apple, of course, would do a much better job on anything, but since customers insist on Photoshop and Office and other apps, he puts up with them. (Well, except, now Apple has their own office suite.) Steve knows that on a computer, having a broad spectrum of apps is more important that having them all be Apple-perfect.Emphasis mine.
But on iPods, Airports, Apple TVs, and now iPhones, Apple wants every app perfect. Which is nice, in theory. In practice, it means innovation only happens at Apple's pace. The marketplace of ideas is much smaller, and the devices are much poorer because of it. (Example: Why can't I stream music from my iPhone or iPod touch to my Airport Express?)
Now, we don't know if Apple plans to open up the iPhone for third-party developers. But Wil is right: Apple doesn't need anyone else mucking up its systems. Some of those unsupported, unofficial third-party hacks would do just that. Muck up the system.
If Apple opens up the iPhone for developers, making third-party apps official and a supported feature of the phone, it won't be able to afford to have those apps crash the phone.
Apps on a computer can crash, sure. We're used to that. There are about five ways to force a misbehaving Mac app to quit, and a crashed Mac up will leave the rest of your system intact.
But remember the days before Mac OS X? Remember the bomb?
Remeber when a crash could render your entire computer unusable?
Do you also remember what happened when your frontmost app got unresponsive? Basically, so did your Mac.
With the limited user interface of the iPhone, a misbehaving app can easily create the illusion of a misbehaving iPhone. How do you know that it's only Johnnie's Shareware Recipe Editor that froze, not your iPhone? Will you blame Johnnie's Shareware Garage, LLC, or Apple, Inc?
Besides, people are far less forgiving about a frozen phone than about a frozen computer. A phone is just a phone, even if it can double as a computer.
What next? Your car keys freezing? Your beer opener?
If Apple does plan to allow third-party apps, it needs to perform some magic that prevents the user from just about ever having an iPhone locked up by third-party software.
Perhaps a daemon should be running, monitoring every application's responsiveness, and returning to the home screen when the frontmost app is having problems? Add a status message that informs the user of this incident? Or should there be a well-advertised, sure-fire, and foolproof user action that never fails to quit a misbehaving app? These things would need to be sorted out.
And besides, Apple would need to isolate parts of the system from direct access by third parties. We know that the iPhone was completed on a tight deadline, remember why Leopard hasn't shipped yet? So, it's not unreasonable to think that its software still has some rough edges, and nobody other than Apple's engineers should really be playing with it for a while.
So even if third-party application development is in the iPhone's future, it's only reasonable to expect that it takes time to implement properly.
I think that, for the near future, iPhone development will consist of the following:
- Apple delivering significant and free software updates: Notice how Apple's subscription-based iPhone accounting suggests that the iPhone will have more features in the future courtesy of Apple.
- Hand-picked third parties delivering applications, either for free or for a small fee: think about Google Maps already on the iPhone, and iPod games that are sold via iTunes. The iPod is also a closed platform, but there's still some third-party development going on, closely controlled by Apple. There's nothing stopping Apple from doing just that. As they would get to "bless" any third-party app before it becomes available, Apple could maintain its strict quality standards for the phone. A rumor to this effect is already out.
- Web applications may transition into Widgets. Rumors already suggest that improvements to the WebKit framework are on their way, enabling "web applications" to be stored offline. What exactly separates an "offline web app" from a Widget? Not much, mostly the capability to run arbitrary code (including Cocoa Objective-C). I'm inclined to think that a Dashboard-like SDK may be a compromise between the needs of Apple and developers: a sandbox with limited access to iPhone features, but at least not something that runs on a server.
Apple's new software updates for the iPhone will certainly serve as an indication as to where Apple wants the device to be heading. The first software update has come and gone, and we still don't have a clipboard, making the iPhone basically useless for any text editing apart from typing out a quick e-mail. There's no user-accessible file system, no SSH client, no instant messaging, no editing capabilities for Microsoft Office documents. In other words, the iPhone is not a PDA, and it's definitely not targeted at enterprise users or geeks.
The iPhone may be the smartest phone ever made, but it's not a smartphone.
Does Apple even want to change that? I'm getting the impression that Apple wants the iPhone to be pretty much what it is today, and those of us who expect software updates to turn it into a device with a greatly expanded set of capabilities will be ultimately disappointed.
I hope to be wrong, but I think Apple wants the vast, almost unlimited potential of the embedded OS X operating system to remain largely unfulfilled on the iPhone.
If the rumors of the Newton's revival are true, then perhaps those of us waiting for an ultrasmart PDA from Apple should set our sights on this new mythical beast, and resign to the fact that the iPhone is, and will always be, a cellphone.
Thursday, June 28, 2007
The iPhone is the new Macintosh
Apple is releasing an expensive device that attempts to redefine an existing product category. Its user interface is so much more advanced, better-designed, more beautiful and more intuitive than any competitor's that it makes Steve Jobs burst into genuine tears of pride and joy. Apple's engineers have put incredible amounts of thought, love and care into details that competitors have largely overlooked so far.
Just about everyone loves the new device, recognizing it as a watershed. And just about everyone bitches about some glaring omissions and missing features.
And they are right. Apple could have conceivably added more and more features to the first shipping version of the product, delaying its launch, but eventually it had to draw the line somewhere. Of course, some (lots) of features didn't make the cut. And many of these are important. But it's a safe bet that most, if not all, of these will be added over time.
Initial reaction […] has been strongly, but not overpoweringly, favorable. A few traditional […] users see the [new user interface elements] as silly, useless frills, and others are outraged at the lack of [certain features], but most users are impressed by the machine and its capabilities. Still, some people have expressed concern about the relatively small [memory] size, the lack of [easy programmability], and the inconvenience of the single disk drive.Of course, I'm talking about the Macintosh. The quote is from Byte, issue 5/1984, page 339.
As for the iPhone: I wonder how long it will take Apple and AT&T to sell the first million. One week? One weekend? One night?
Now that the reviews are in, the consensus seems to be that the iPhone is a revolutionary device with flaws. Everyone has his or her favorite missing feature.* But the iPhone is already off to a better start than the iPod was five years ago. And boy, did that product evolve from the clunky, heavy, boxy kludge with the one-bit screen!
Apple has apparently mastered the art of show-stopping omission management. It makes bold guesses about which features it can leave out without having people not just complain about them, but also refuse to buy the product. Remember: the original iPod lacked an equalizer, among other things. It was easy to ridicule an MP3 player without such a feature, yet Apple went ahead without it. The omission was later easily corrected in software.
And a lot of the iPhone's missing features are, theoretically, just a software update away. And Apple has, somewhat uncharacteristically, already promised lots of (unnamed) new features.
Now, if only one could also download a GPS chip, a 3G antenna, and some Flash memory…
*Mine is the lack of copy and paste. However, one should realize just how much work it would, or rather, hopefully, will, be to add this: it needs a new gesture or a new mode, new buttons, new decisions, new metaphors. My suggestion would be an "edit mode," where "Cut," "Copy" and "Paste" buttons appear, and you select text by dragging with one finger; and scroll around by dragging with two fingers, à la MacBook and MacBook Pro.
Friday, June 22, 2007
Here is my executive summary of the WWDC keynote
There's a new Desktop and Dock whose main feature is that they look much better in full page print ads. Call it marketing-optimization, but it looks good. Everyone hates the mimicry of the new menu bar, but I don't think I'll have any problems with it.
The number one top secret feature of Leopard is apparently Stacks. Huh? Dock folders done kinda right? Okay... Gimme some more RDF.
Brushed metal is dead, Aqua is dying. Welcome back, Platinum! Everyone, quickly redesign your apps now! I find the new look a bit too dark. But I like the huge shadow the frontmost window casts.
Now there is absolutely no way to tell the Finder apart from iTunes. Cover flow will be useful. Yes, I'm serious. Especially with inline preview, as well as Quick Look. These may become as revolutionary (that is, for people who actually work on their Macs) as Exposé was. But what about the new huge sidebar? Will there be a way to hide it? Or shall we all buy Macs with bigger screens?
The Finder is incomplete, though. Where's the online Finder Store? I want to buy files for 99 cents, folders for $9.99. And we need a good visualizer and an equalizer.
OK, maybe this iTunes fetish thing is going a bit too far. Maybe Steve needs therapy. But at least the iPhone holds strong, and fights back any attempted iTunes influence: no silly search field, no pesky visualizer, and definitely no connection to that stupid online store.
Core animation is still cool. It's being used in subtly cartoonish ways. I hoped, based on Wil Shipley's raving commentary, that Apple would use it in the OS in a lot of fun ways, but it's not the case. Maybe Steve's legendary taste won't allow that.
We're still going to get Spaces. Too bad that it still seems to break Exposé.
Dashboard. Apple is taking it to a whole new level by… adding, count it, one widget. Movies. Pretty slick. U.S. only, I suppose, though…
iChat never fails to impress. At least it never fails to impress Phil Schiller. (Actually, nothing ever fails to impress Phil Schiller, but we love the guy.) He was almost hyperventilating when he announced, "We can look at a PDF together!" Would you have thought that fifty years ago? Travel to Mars, maybe. Pimp your PDF over the Internet? No way, no how.
Time Machine is huge. Educating people about the importance of backing up. Changing habits of users worldwide. Boom. Dunno if it works, but definitely looks amazing. The retro sci-fi icon is insanely cool on so many levels. Time Machine seems to be the backbone of the whole marketing theme for Leopard. Aptly, this keynote already makes me feel like it's WWDC '06 all over again. But the "Final Countdown meets Star Wars" imagery is definitely refreshing after Tiger's unimaginative metal-on-fur logo.
A leaked screenshot mentions "hourly backups […] saved daily" until your disk is full, which is ambiguous and sounds potentially stupid, but I hope it will soon be clarified, and turn out to be something smarter. Like, only backing up files that have changed.
Mail is cool too. Notes are great, just great. Really. Too bad they look horrendous. It will be an open architecture, so third parties, please fix it ASAP. Mail also recognizes addresses. But will this work with non-English addresses as well?
There was no mention of iLife. I still cling on to my speculation that it will be bundled with Leopard for free. I guess I don't know when to give up. But anyway, iPhoto now integrates with Mail, so that's one more indication that iLife will be part of the OS. Right? Please?
iPhone: no additional features were revealed. We still haven't seen the Calendar or Notes, we still don't know how text editing works in any of the apps. Can you select text? Can you cut and paste? No sign of either has been revealed, ever. Still no Spotlight, either. OK, we have less than a week and we'll see, but I'm beginning to think that version 1.0 of the iPhone OS will be even more stripped-down than I'd thought.
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
iPhone: a new platform for web applications that could revive the NC concept
Well, anyone hoping for a real SDK for the iPhone must be disappointed as hell. But then really, how reasonable was it to expect Apple to not just finish the iPhone in time (which we know was a close call), but also create a complete set of developer tools for it, including user interface guidelines and all? I think those who are disappointed kind of deserve to be.
So Steve tossed a bone to developers. His suggestion that they should develop web apps for the iPhone will certainly infuriate a lot of them, and it does seem a bit audacious to me as well. However, I'm sure that once Apple gets around to creating it, a real SDK will be there for all aspiring iPhone developers. But, seeing how carefully Apple wants to control both the stability and the public image of the iPhone, that should take a while. I agree with just about everything that Daniel Eran says on the subject.
However, I also think Steve Jobs is really on to something here. I don't doubt for a second that there will be hundreds, maybe thousands of websites or web applications written specifically for the iPhone. Not just because whenever Jobs speaks, people will start to listen, and stuff will be happening (though the Jobsian charisma is definitely part of it), but also because the iPhone and its Safari web browser will very likely create a new business: that of handheld web applications.
- The iPhone has limited resources, while a web app usually lives on a powerful and scalable server. Therefore the remote app can perform operations faster than a local iPhone application could.
- The user interface of a web application is closer to that of an iPhone app than it is to a desktop application. Due to their greatly simplified user interfaces, iPhone apps have fewer advantages over web applications than desktop apps do, so web applications will look less out of place on the device.
Saturday, June 09, 2007
Leaked iPhone sales textbook reveals Spartan feature set, lack of AT&T crapware
Uncharacteristically, Macrumors.com has posted an original story that got picked up by the entire Mac web, featuring the scanned pages of a sales training booklet that helps AT&T employees sell the iPhone.
No significant new features are revealed, though. As the workbook often states the obvious, it might be safe to assume that its failure to mention a functionality (e.g. voice dialing) probably means that the functionality in question is not going to be part of the iPhone, at least at the time of its launch.
The lack of GPS mapping is mentioned as a potential "objection" to be expected from prospective clients, and the guide even offers a canned answer, thanking the client for the feedback and promising to forward it to Apple. Unfortunately, there's no mention of any alternative geographical positioning solution.
Considering all of this, as well as the new TV ads, I'm getting more and more convinced that the iPhone's June 29 incarnation will to be a true 1.0 release, with the absolute minimum functionality Apple deemed necessary for the launch. MMS or voice dialing, which, frankly, nobody uses, have fallen victim to this strategy. The device should wow millions with its sex appeal and user-friendliness, and convert unsuspecting iPod users into smartphone owners.
As for business users, or even simple power users like yours truly: the iPhone will need some improvements to be truly useful for us. For example, I will definitely need to be able to select, copy and paste text, and so far, I haven't seen any indication that this would be possible.
But we are a small, hard-to-please crowd. Clearly, Apple isn't after us, at least not in the beginning.
By the way, for me, the most entertaining parts of the presentation have been the comparisons with other AT&T offerings. It's amazing how much crap AT&T is trying to feed to its customers, and Apple must really feel victorious about shielding iPhone users from all that: the AT&T Music Folder, MEdia Net, Cellular Video, and others all get a mention as no-shows on the device. Apple also doesn't believe in partnering with MobiTV or TeleNav.
Thursday, June 07, 2007
OK, it's time for some WWDC predictions
Let me grab my crystal ball. Damn, where have I put it… Uh, what the hell is it doing in the…? Never mind. I'll just wipe it off. OK, here's what I see.
I see Leopard, Leopard everywhere. It has been neglected. Everyone's talking about the iPhone, almost to the point where Leopard's only new feature seems to be its delayed launch. The WWDC will reverse that.
Speaking of the iPhone: it will definitely get a mention. If some iPhone integration thing is one of Leopard's secret features (outlook hazy), then there will be more talk and demos. Otherwise, just a recap of the January demo, answer to some FAQs, and an update on the then-missing features. As far as the rumored development options (lightweight apps or widgets): nope, I don't think so. It's way too early for that. Unless it's something really limited, like widgets with little or no custom code.
I see the iMac getting an update, not necessarily at the keynote, though. It could happen on Tuesday as well. Depends on how significant an update it is. Rumormongers are talking about a brushed aluminum enclosure, re-positioning the iMac as a pro machine, while discontinuing the 17" model. Well, maybe, but that would be a bit strange: will the Mac mini become the single consumer desktop Mac available? This might be one of the cases when the rumoristas are on to something, but they are getting confused by the reports they are receiving. (I just dropped my crystal ball, but before hitting the floor, it displayed the words "iMac Pro." Hmmmm… The "i" prefix used to be the antonym of the "Power" prefix, but now "Power" is out, and "Pro" is in… So iMac Pro is a possibility. Whatever. Stupid crystal ball. I think it's still under warranty.)
OK, back to Leopard. What will be its top secret features? Here's what I see.
Dot-Mac. I see that poor miserable excuse for a service finally undergoing a long-overdue relaunch, with increased disk space and functionality, tied in neatly to Leopard. I also happen to think that Google CEO Eric Schmidt sits on Apple's board for a reason: to teach Apple how to become a web services company. Remember what happened shortly after Gap CEO Millard Drexler joined Apple's board? (Hint: Apple became the best retailer in America.)
iLife. I think iLife will simply become a part of Leopard. It will be free, updates and all. It might be also integrated even more tightly into the OS, as in Finder contextual menus, etc.
Appearance. Will it change drastically, as everyone seems to hope, believe, or simply know? Nope. Brushed metal will be gone, Core Animation will be all over the place (I think Apple is the biggest customer of its own dog food when it comes to system frameworks.) But I don't think Aqua is going anywhere.
And… this is the point when the hard disk of my crystal ball died. I have checked it in for repair, but they say it won't be ready till Monday the earliest, and it will be far too late by then. Damn, it was just getting to the most exciting parts.
So I can't tell, for example, it Apple plans to announce some new device or new technology, like multi-touch input-output devices. I don't think so, though. Leopard needs to grab as much of the focus as it can.
Monday, June 04, 2007
Breaking news: Apple posts iPhone ads, sets release date
See here. Release date is confirmed at June 29.
Notice how the ads all mention the phone functionality as a punch line, almost as some extra bit that you wouldn't expect from the product, despite the "phone" in its name. The first ad extolls the virtues of the iPhone as an iPod, which seems to further corroborate the speculation that Apple won't release a "phoneless iPhone" true video iPod any time soon.
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
I hope Apple will buy its soul back from AT&T one day
Apple wants to make sure nothing goes wrong at the launch of the iPhone. For a while, everything else is taking a back seat, as customers are suffering in silence. You shouldn't expect any iPod updates any time soon. Leopard has been delayed. But the worse news is the oldest: Apple is teaming up with AT&T in an exclusive deal, tying all U.S. purchases of the phone to an AT&T subscription plan.Apple gets help in something it has never done before: launching a mobile phone.
In exchange, it has agreed to sell its soul.
Everyone congratulated Apple for playing hardball with yet another industry (after successfully tackling record labels): there will be no stickers, no joint branding, no silly AT&T applications compromising the beautiful iPhone. Yet I beg to differ. I think buying an iPhone will be riddled with huge compromises.
Apple users are seen as discerning customers with a good taste, people who want value for money, who cannot be fooled into restrictive contracts.
This is why I think it's just simply against the DNA of Apple and its users to sell a cellphone that only works with one provider.
When I bought my Handspring Treo 270 smartphone four years ago (a revolutionary product in its own right), it came without a subscription or a subsidy. I took the SIM card out of my old phone, and put it into my Treo. That was it, I could start making phone calls right away. For data access, I had to change a few settings. It took me five minutes.
Later I switched mobile carriers. All I needed to do was replace the SIM card, and I was good to go. When I traveled abroad, I could just buy a pre-paid SIM card and pop it in, for much better rates. And if I wanted to, I could use my Treo without any SIM card at all, as it had lots of functionalities that didn't require one.
Today, Palm (previously Handspring, previously... never mind) offers subsidized as well as "unlocked" versions of its Treo phones. I think this is how a self-respecting customer buys an expensive, revolutionary smartphone. There should be a choice.
As for the iPhone: you absolutely have to get a plan from AT&T. There's no other way to buy one.
- If you have another plan with another carrier, you have to cancel it or keep paying both.
- If you go abroad, you have to pay roaming fees.
- If you just want the device for its other uses (iPod, WiFi-enabled internet device) and aren't interested in a mobile carrier plan at the moment, again, you're out of luck.
This isn't exactly the kind of hardball Apple plays with the music industry. Sure, if you want to purchase songs from iTunes, you'll have to settle for what the labels are selling you (though Apple is there to watch out for the terms). But that's where the analogy ends. if you don't like the iTunes Store, you never have to use it. Sales of iPod might be just fine without the approval of the five record labels. And Steve Jobs does display a "take it or leave it" mentality when dealing with the labels, when refusing to increase prices, when urging them to drop DRM in open letters. He's the last chance for a crumbling industry, and he knows it. His offers aren't supposed to be turned down.
Not so with the iPhone and AT&T. It's not the Apple with the pirate flag any more. It's not the defiant Apple we know and love. Nope, it's AT&T's little obedient lapdog that we see there. AT&T may significantly help Apple reach its iPhone sales goals, but I think Apple and its clients are paying a great price for this.
While I have no sources to back me up on this one, I'm also pretty sure AT&T has a say in what can and cannot go into the iPhone. I'm sure Skype or iChat, maybe the most natural applications for the device, were vetoed by the telecom giant as they could compete with its voice services. Basically any hope that the iPhone could truly change the mobile phone industry was lost when Apple went to bed with one of its giants.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a realist. I understand that initial sales of the iPhone are the single most important data that matters in the life of this product. This is what everyone, including investors, competitors, the entire cellphone industry and the media will be looking at. Apple has to get that right in order to establish itself in this new market. This is probably why it entered into such an uncharacteristic contract.
I just hope that eventually, Apple will be able to buy back its soul, and get out of this lousy, restrictive deal that screws its customers. I want to be able to buy an iPhone without being forever tethered to some big, dumb, evil telephone company.
Also, it remains to be seen how Apple plans to pull off the iPhone launch in Europe: a much bigger, more saturated, more mature cellphone market. A similar strategy might simply crash and burn in the old continent, where the iPod (a major iPhone component/selling point) isn't as strong as in America. For example, the iPod only has 28% of the German market.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Europe: a fragmented market for the iPhone, despite EU-wide carriers
According to AppleInsider, Vodafone is seen as the most likely European carrier for the iPhone. So, Europe will have a single iPhone carrier, just like the U.S., right?Wrong. In Europe, Vodafone is not a company, it's a brand. In some countries, Vodafone Group Plc. has subsidiaries, in others, it has affiliates, and in yet others, only partners without any ownership affiliation. According to Wikipedia, Vodafone is present through partners only in as many as 12 of the 27 EU countries!
How fast will Vodafone get all these companies to launch the iPhone in their respective markets? Unless Apple bitches and moans and threatens the world's largest telecom company into getting its act together, there can be several-month differences between introductions in different member states, as has been the case with many cellphone launches. (One I have been experiencing, waiting for months in frustration, was the Sony Ericsson P910i a few years ago. The Hungarian launch came months after the UK and German introductions.)
The EU isn't a single telecom market yet: it's actually 27 separate markets, with their own separate national telecom authorities. This is supposed to change after this summer, but the iPhone will most likely still need 27 approvals.
Worse, the 27 Vodafones and Vodafone partners are very separate entities who don't really talk to each other. Yet another personal anecdote: when I moved abroad, I asked Vodafone if I could transfer my two-year subscription to the Vodafone in my new home country. Of course not.
Apart from the brand, there's very little in common between the different Vodafones in the EU. Terms, prices and services vary greatly. I wonder how Apple will manage.
So should Apple choose another carrier? Nope, my post wouldn't be much different if, say, T-Mobile were the most likely candidate. It's not a Vodafone problem, it's an EU problem.
Just think about the iTunes store. I'm not sure if everyone knows, but 12 of the EU's 27 member states still have no access to the store. (It's a different 12 from the countries without a Vodafone affiliate, so no, it's not a pattern.) Establishing a single European market is a great endeavor, and the EU has come a long way, but there's still a lot of distance to cover.
Friday, March 30, 2007
Why the iPhone is a safe bet for Apple
Does Apple run a huge risk with the iPhone? It has been pointed out several times just how competitive the cellphone market is, how unfamiliar Apple is with the sector, and how hard it may be for the company to succeed.It might appear that Apple has sunk tremendous R&D costs into developing the iPhone: it's truly a revolutionary product, with hundreds of patents and breakthrough features. In creating the iPhone, Apple even ported OS X to a different processor, and shoehorned it into a tiny handheld device! And unlike the clumsy mobile version of Windows (whose name is seemingly changed more frequently than Steve Ballmer's underwear), the iPhone OS actually seems like a product that has actually been adapted to the needs of its users.
What if the iPhone fails? Will Apple just write off all the time and money it invested into it? Will all that great technology be thrown out, and will the company sulk back to manufacturing Macs and iPods?
No. First of all, I think the iPhone is very unlikely to fail. I think people want it badly. They can hardly wait to get one. The momentum that has been building up behind the iPhone should be strong enough to guarantee exceptional sales.
But even if initial reaction proves to be less than stellar, Apple can pretty much still fix the product in software: it can add killer features, it can open it up as a development platform, and so on. The possibilities are endless, especially in light of the Cocoa frameworks that enable rapid software development.
But let's imagine the worst-case scenario, a Cube-style disaster. Let's imagine that the iPhone sells so badly that Apple needs to discontinue it. Then what?
Here's what would happen then. Apple's stock would tank. Paul Thurott, Rob Enderle, and that other idiot whose name I forget would celebrate by tap dancing and farting.
And about three seconds later, Apple would release a new generation of the iPod that would make everyone's jaw drop.
It would be the iPhone without the phone. It would play widescreen movies. It would use multi-touch. It would have your photo library on it. You could take notes with it. It would still be a PDA. It would have WiFi, it would have Safari, it would have Google Earth, it would have Skype.
It would do things that AT&T/Cingular would never let the iPhone do. It would have dozens of gigabytes of flash memory. And it would sell below $400.
And this thing would sell like nothing has sold ever before.
How do I know?
Easy. That's because such an iPod is coming anyway. Can you imagine this not happening? Will the iPod forever have a screen the size of a keyhole? Starting June, if you want the best iPod Apple has made, you will have to buy the iPhone. That's yet another way Apple wants to help the sales of the phone. But obviously, that will change eventually: shouldn't the iPod be the best iPod ever made? How long can it afford to be out-iPodded by another product?!
Obviously, Apple's releasing a higher-end product first. If it created a widescreen iPod before the iPhone, the latter would sell worse. So the new iPod will have to wait. How long it will have to wait depends largely on the success of the iPhone, I think.
But I'm convinced that the new, "iPhone without a phone" iPod is already ready, and mass production could start any moment a certain red phone rings.
And of course, now that OS X has been ported to a tiny device, Apple will never be the same company again.
And it's not an isolated phenomenon, either. Apple TV has turned out to be a stripped-down Mac, running Mac OS X, performing a dedicated function. For $300. Am I the only one who thinks that the implications of this are huge?
Apple is taking computing into completely new places. It's porting OS X left, right and center. Who knows what products Apple has in the pipeline?
The iPhone is just a beginning. Sure, it's important for Apple that it succeed. Yet even in the unlikely event that it fails, the technologies behind it are ready to power several other products, including iPods with pretty much guaranteed sales.
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
In search of Spotlight on the iPhone
Only a handful of people outside Apple have had the chance to hold an iPhone in their hands, so we only know about it what Apple has publicly demonstrated (or allowed some lucky journalists to see on the few working prototypes).
Almost all of the functionality that Steve Jobs showed at the keynote is being presented as a series of demo movies on Apple's iPhone page, with the same glaring omissions (e.g. Notes and Calendar are both MIA).
This indicates that the iPhone isn't ready yet. Apple hasn't commented on the iPhone's features beyond what was revealed in January, so the product is still shrouded in a great deal of secrecy. In other words, what we haven't seen is either not planned, or simply not yet ready. We just don't know.
But one thing we really should have seen (but didn't) in a lot of the demos is the famous Mac OS X search box. The box with the rounded corners and the magnifying glass icon that first appeared in iTunes user interface, and became its main selling points. The box that has become synonymous with Mac OS X itself, the box that now appears in the Finder, in Mail, and just about every self-respecting Cocoa application. The search box that is now the front door to an excellent (and much-hyped) OS X search technology: Spotlight.
And that search box ain't there on the iPhone*.
We know that iPhone runs OS X. (Not Mac OS X, mind you, but still, some OS X. Jobs made a big deal of it at the keynote, listing its advantages and features.
Conspicuously missing was Spotlight.
Is it conceivable that Apple would ship its (first version of the) iPhone without Spotlight?
If one of the most important features of iTunes has been the easy searchability of large music libraries, how can the same feature be absent from the first iPod where it would be conceivable?
Scrolling through songs and genres and albums and so on is great, and it's fun, too, with the addictive multi-touch user interface. (I haven't tried it, but I'll believe whomever says so.) Yet why not let me search, too, just like in iTunes? What if I don't know the first word of a song's title? What if I only know the last name of the singer?
Jobs seemed especially proud of the iPhone's solution for a keyboard. Why not put it to some use then?
How about contacts? The Treo has got that one thing right. Shouldn't the iPhone at least match it?
As Jobs demonstrated the official way to select contacts, I was shaking my head. Again, flicking through names is cool, but quickly selecting contacts from a list has been done, and has been done better. Way better.
Even ordinary cellphones let you type in the first few characters of a name, and narrow your often-huge contact list down to your search results. Even with the cheapest multi-tap (not to be confused with Multi-touch) Nokia phones, one can quickly find a contact this way.
And if your phone has a QWERTY keyboard, the speed increase becomes dramatic. Add a smart search functionality, like that of the Treo, and (as Jobs would say) Boom! In literally less than a second after taking your smartphone in your hand, after all you did was type a few characters from a contact's name (could be as few as three keystrokes), you're one button press away from placing a call to the person you had in mind!
Flashy graphics aside, OS X notwithstanding, and however natural scrolling feels, it's dramatically less efficient to find and select a contact on the iPhone without a search functionality.
And again, what if you only remember a first name? A company name? A job title? A city?
Doesn't it just feel wrong if the iPhone won't give you one of the coolest, most useful OS X features: the possibility to narrow down a long list based on simply entering various uncategorized search criteria? Wouldn't such search functionality be the most useful on a handheld device, notably a cellphone, which you often use in urgent situations?
Spotlight alone, if fully implemented, could make the iPhone stand out even among the geekiest of smartphones. On the other hand, without any implementation of a search functionality, the iPhone could prove to be woefully inadequate in a field with cut-throat competition.
*Google Earth does have a search box, but I haven't found one anywhere else in any iPhone demo.
Thursday, January 25, 2007
Widescreen Beatles Super Bowl iPod? I don't think so
According to AppleGazette, people predict that a widescreen iPod would debut, loaded with Beatles songs (similarly to the U2 iPod), either at the Super Bowl in less than two weeks, or at Apple's rumored February 20 event.
I don't think so.
Beatles? Maybe. Steve Jobs did play a lot of Beatles during his last keynote, so many suspect an announcement regarding the addition of Beatles tracks to the iTunes Store is imminent. Either that, or Jobs was just being, well, Jobs again, asking for forgiveness rather than permission, just like with that Eminem commercial earlier (or with the iPhone name later). It's hard to tell, but one would think the former version to be more likely, what with the decades-long Apple vs. Apple saga.
My problem is with the widescreen part. Apple has just announced a widescreen iPod: it's called the iPhone. One of the main selling points of Apple's upcoming cellphone will be being "the best iPod" ever made. Apple wants to firmly establish it as its new platform. Apple wants to sell a lot of it. And Apple sure as hell doesn't want to cannibalize its sales with a competing product.
The iPhone won't ship for another five months. What would happen if a product went on sale next month, offering an attractive subset of the iPhone's functionality, including its mulititouch user interface, presumably a hard disk, and no shackles tying it to an evil cellphone company?
How silly would Apple appear for announcing a product months ahead, only to upstage it with a competing product that ships immediately?
That's right. The iPhone could be close to DOA. It could pull a Zune.
Unless Apple has been working on a completely different widescreen iPod, with a seriously dumbed-down multitouch user interface, I don't expect a widescreen version until the iPhone has shipped, and its first-quarter sales numbers have come out strong. I'd rather expect either price drops with but cosmetic changes to the current form factor, or not even that much.
I'm not expecting a widescreen, phoneless iPod running OS X and featuring a lot of the iPhone technologies until the next Christmas buying season.
Oh, and there's another reason why it's difficult to imagine a widescreen iPod going on sale in Q1, 2007: apparently, parts of the iPhone software, notably the Notes app, aren't ready yet. And iPods also have notes. No demo of the Calendar application (another iPod staple) has been seen anywhere yet, either.
Saturday, January 13, 2007
Hey, Cisco, just stop being obnoxious!
A Canadian news source has some details on the Apple vs. Cisco case over the iPhone trademark.
Can Apple, for once, use the rumors defense? As in, everyone had known for months that Apple was going to release an iPhone, a fact that Cisco, a trademark squatter with nefarious intents, chose to willfully take unfair advantage of.
When 99 out of 100 people would associate the iPhone name with Apple, Cisco, in an obnoxious and childish ploy that amused only idiots, released some painfully uninspiring product by that name, so it could show it around in court, get some publicity, and try to force Apple into literally "being friends" and "playing with" Cisco.
While this defense would hold little water in court, and the whole affair is reminiscent of the old, legendary cheeky ways of Steve Jobs, who, at least according to the less-than-accurate iCon book, similarly failed to secure the Macintosh trademark in due time, let's just all agree that the iPhone name just belongs to Apple. I would be disappointed if Apple were to change it to "Apple phone," "MacPhone" or "iPod phone." It would be a shame.
Hey, Cisco's "iPhone" already got greater publicity than it ever deserved. Let Cisco sell the whole trademark to Apple for ten million dollars, and give its own pathetic excuse for an iPhone a real, serious Cisco-like name like "ONS 15310-MA MSPP."
Tuesday, January 09, 2007
My first 25 random questions about the iPhone (updated with some answers)
- Is Bill Gates calling Steve Ballmer about now, asking him in a broken, nervous whisper, "We didn't do that Zune thing after all, did we? It was just an idea we dropped, right?"
- What processor does the iPhone have?
Probably an ARM. But definitely not an Intel (according to Intel, and they should know). - Will there be developer tools for the iPhone?
No. Apple execs tell Gizmodo that, "like an iPod, it won't be an open system that people can develop for." - Will iPod games run on the iPhone?
Stupid question, sorry. As the OS is different, it's hardly likely. - Can we say Apple released a tablet computer today?
- Why isn't the iPhone full of Spotlight search boxes? They could be really useful.
- What kind of Widgets can the iPhone run?
- How many pundits will announce today that Apple is no longer interested in the Mac?
- Does the iPhone have a clipboard?
- Does the iPhone support drag and drop?
- Can the iPhone squirt?
- Just about now, does Palm CEO Ed Colligan start feeling really stupid? And insecure?
- Will the iPhone display PDF files?
Yes, though it won't open Office documents. - Can the iPhone download things from the iTunes Store? Why not?
Nope (see the same Gizmodo piece). I can see, by the way, why it's not so easy. - What kind of OS X does the iPhone run?
"Not OS X proper," say Apple execs according to Gizmodo. Looks like OS X has just been moved to yet another processor (though this is not Mac OS X, just OS X.) - Is the iPhone GUI any indication for the upcoming Leopard look?
- How much will an iPhone cost without a contract?
Looks like that simply won't be an option. Damn. - Are all smartphone manufacturers looking at their screens just about now, with a blank stare, swallowing repeatedly?
- Can the iPhone do GPRS?
- Can you save files from iPhone apps? Can you access them from your Mac?
- What other phone functionality does it have? Voice dial? Alarm clock?
- What angle will bloggers use to ridicule the iPhone?
- Will the HD-based iPods become phone-less iPhones eventually?
- When will we learn the answers to about a million technical questions that are on everyone's minds?
- How many journalists are typing the words "Zune killer" somewhere right now?
It's official: iPhone is the Next Big Thing
Wow. It's real. It's a smartphone indeed. It's also an iPod. And what few hoped or predicted, it's also a handheld computer, in the truest sense of the word. And it is called iPhone.
All in all, it seems to be almost exactly what I was secretly hoping for.
Here's where I wondered if Apple was going to add advanced input capabilities to an upcoming iPod:
If and when the touchscreen iPod becomes real, it could allow for an input area large enough to contain a QWERTY keypad [...]. And if the iPod gets a QWERTY, it may take on a completely new life with vastly expanded capabilities. Its software is quite advanced even today, and just imagine what could happen to the platform if its greatest limitation, its lack of input options, could be overcome...(Apple files yet another weird hardware patent, Mac Thought Crime, November 17)
Here's where I speculated that Apple could revive the ailing PDA market with the iPod:
In what would be a small step for Apple, but a great step for the ailing PDA market, a new-generation iPod could sprout advanced PDA features any day, and take over the PDA market overnight.(How the iPod could save the PDA without trying (too hard), Mac Thought Crime, November 21)
Here's where I pondered a scenario where Apple would turn the touch-screen iPod into a completely new platform, with phone capabilities:
[Scenario] 3. It's iPod 2.0, and it can do phones as well: Apple expands the iPod platform into a handheld computer, iPhone is just one application. OK, imagine this. Apple doesn't stop at putting video, games, calendars and some basic contact management on an iPod. Nope: Apple takes it all the way to the next level. With a touch-screen interface, the iPod could do anything. Apple could kick new life into the PDA market it created (though it wasn't Steve). It could consummate the mission of this MP3 player of truly evolving into the Next Big Thing. Oh, and it could also function as a phone. Let's dedicate one model to that. Ladies and gentlemen, meet the iPhone.(So iPhone equals iPod plus what? Mac Thought Crime, December 4)
Odds: 9 to 1. I'd put in a larger number, but this is Steve Jobs we're talking about.
Wow factor: 300%. As in, "Holy @#$^%!!!"
Here's where I guessed (absolutely correctly) that Cisco may license the iPhone name to Apple:
Maybe Apple has sought a deal with Cisco about the iPhone name all along, and talks have broken down only recently. Or what the hell, maybe they haven't, and Cisco even allowed Apple to also use the name (without any announcements, of course). Maybe Cisco just wants to ride Apple's publicity a bit. Anything is possible, as far as we all know.(Deal with it: Apple's cellphone is still coming, Mac Thought Crime, December 18)
By the way, Apple does own iphone.org.
And here are a few last-minute thoughts from earlier today that didn't turn out to be as clueless as I feared:
Touch-screen iPod, iPod phone, Apple smartphone, and the thing that makes Jobs more excited than the Macintosh did… How many things are these? Do they all exist? Or is it just one thing, grossly misunderstood?(Confusing, contradictory rumors abound on Apple's new device, Mac Thought Crime, January 9)
I hope Apple is in a position today to become more like Sony, and diversify. Create new things. As in, mobile phones and PDAs. Apple-branded versions of these devices have been but a pipe dream for a long time, but not any more. The iPod phone is a given (though not necessarily at the Expo), and the iPod PDA is a possibility.(Will 2007 turn Apple into Sony? Mac Thought Crime, January 9)
As it turns out, at least one of Apple's MWSF posters will tout the year 2007 (as does Apple's homepage). Will we see a(n unlikely) roadmap for the rest of the year, or will 2007 start with a bang? We'll see very soon.
But, of course, this was all mindless, idle speculation. What we have is an actual product that Apple has finally announced, taking up almost its entire two-hour MWSF keynote.
(OK, the device formerly known as iTV, and now referred to by an unpronouncable Apple symbol, also got some spotlight.)
Unbelievable
With the iPhone, Apple did not deliver on the expectations of the market or even the fans: it delivered on the wildest pipe dreams of its most rabid fans.
Who could have realistically expected all of these (in one device):
- A handheld device running OS X? (Note how it's not called Mac OS X.)
- A phone at that, with truly spectacular and innovative features?
- A multitouch interface with some incredibly intuitive input methods?
- A widescreen iPod with 320 x 480 pixels of screen real estate?
- An entirely new, future-proof platform that can be extended indefinitely by software updates?
- A beautiful and futuristic user interface, with elegant, smooth animations and transitions?
- An almost non-Apple-like, cool, futuristic, yet elegant industrial design?
- Such a tiny form factor?
- Proximity, light and acceleration sensors?
So, did Apple screw it up?
Of course, I'm still hyperventilating from the effects of the Reality Distortion Field. But let me try and approach the iPhone a bit more objectively.
In October, I posted a list of requirements for a smartphone I'd buy. Let me revisit that list, and see how the actual iPhone stacks up:
1. Give me a QWERTY – Done!
Apple does include a virtual QWERTY keypad on the iPhone. (How it will handle accented characters, copying, pasting, etc., remains to be seen. These can mean a lot.)
2. Let me work with files – Don't know.
There's very little information available on Apple's iPhone site. Even elementary things are missing, such as what processor the device will use. My second requirement isn't addressed either, but my bet is that we'll soon find out. Anyway, I would be surprised if the iPhone couldn't sync its files with a Mac (or a PC). However, it looks as though iTunes will be the main vehicle for syncing. (Note that the iPhone is also PC compatible.)
3. No artificial quotas, please – Probably done!
This was my request:
I hope iPhone will ship with plenty of flash RAM. But whether it's 128MBytes or 2GBytes, I want to be put in charge of how I use it. If I want to store a million SMS messages and no sound files, I don't want some silly quota that caps the number of text messages at, say, two hundred.I guess iPhone's version of OS X isn't interested in such quotas. But we can't know for sure.
4. Let me save my text messages – Don't know.
SMS is handled by an iChat-like application. I saw no hint of any ability to save transcripts, but perhaps it's done automatically. Again, we'll see.
5. Don't make me use the touch screen – A big 'No,' but maybe it's all good
Almost the entire iPhone user interface is based on direct manipulation of screen objects, much more so than any device before it. This flies directly in the face of what I wished for, i.e. that a keypad and some controls should be able to suffice for any actions. However, maybe it's all for the better. I just want to be able to perform most operations, like typing and sending an SMS by one hand, and without moving all around the map all the time. I'll have to see an iPhone in person before I can decide.
6. I want a browser with multiple windows – Done!
'Nuff said. A big thumbs-up.
7. Multitask, and honestly, too – Done!
Apple is very emphatic about this feature.
8. Nothing should take more than three keypresses – Don't know, not really.
This is what I wrote:
Menus are all the rage, and Apple adores the iPod's limited number of buttons. But still, going into a freakin' menu so that I can change playback volume is a bit of an annoyance. On a cellphone, I need to be able to start typing an SMS after two keystrokes. I need to be able to locate a contact and place a call in two seconds (e.g. by entering a search mode, and selecting the contact by typing an initial letter or two of some of its contact info). I know Steve Jobs has probably fired people over the number of any extra keys, but there should be just enough of them to let me access any function in a few seconds.My, oh my… The iPhone has only one button! The horror…!
But let's see the demos on Apple's iPhone page.
Calling: this requires a bit too many taps for my taste. I'd tap "Phone," the "Contacts," and then tap-search for my contact. I need additional taps to place the call. Maybe this can be quicker, and it's certainly not horrible. Without trying it myself, I have no way of knowing even whether this is the best way possible.
One thing that puzzles and disappoints me, though, is the lack of search boxes, both in Phone and iPod modes. I'd expect the inventor of Spotlight and the famed iTunes search box to do something about this. I mean, what if I only remember someone's first name? I need to go through my entire contact list to find him or her. The Treo may have beaten the iPhone in this.
Music: at least there's a separate volume widget that's always present in vertical mode, so you don't have a proliferation of menus.
SMS: accessible by one touch, but the demo doesn't show how to start a new conversation (rather than continuing an old one).
All in all, some quick-access features are impressive, while others may seem a bit lacking. And we have too little information as of now. This one also goes undecided.
So there you have it, iPhone has at least four of my eight requests covered. Another three look promising, and two are a bit worrying. But the iPhone also redefines some concepts, so these points may not even all apply to it.
In any case, one thing is certain. I will get one. And if I could get one today, I would get one today. I'd stand in a queue till midnight.
Confusing, contradictory rumors abound on Apple's new device
Sometimes rumormongers, leakers and analysts get it all mixed up. For example, before the release of the Cube, many took whatever details they had and arrived at the conclusion that the Power Mac would get a new cube form factor. Few suspected a new Mac besides the Power Mac.
Maybe something similar is happening with the new mystery product Apple is now expected to release today. Maybe it isn't an iPod phone after all. Maybe it isn't a touch-screen iPod either.
Maybe it's both. And maybe it's neither.
To me, the hyping of the entire year 2007 suggests the emergence of a new platform from Apple. Maybe Apple didn't go out of its way and designed a new, scaled-down OS for handheld devices. Maybe Apple simply decided that now it's time for an ultra-portable Mac, in a subnotebook or handheld form factor, that is capable of running a (more or less) full version of Mac OS X.
We don't know. But… Touch-screen iPod, iPod phone, Apple smartphone, and the thing that makes Jobs more excited than the Macintosh did… How many things are these? Do they all exist? Or is it just one thing, grossly misunderstood?
Okay, we will see.
Monday, January 08, 2007
Beware the wrath of Motorolas and Nokias, oh Apple!
The New York Times thinks that Apple will release a very smart phone tomorrow, more like a pocket computer.
"Apple is about to touch off a nuclear war," said Paul Mercer, a software designer and president of Iventor, a designer of software for hand-helds based in Palo Alto, California. "The Nokias and the Motorolas will have to respond."Well, yeah. Meanwhile, we're still waiting for the Panasonics, Pioneers, Sonies, etc. to respond to the iPod challenge.
Will 2007 turn Apple into Sony?
Damn. One of the real reasons why I always wanted to write a Mac blog was so that I can publish Macworld Expo predictions and speculation. However, this year is difficult. There are already way too many shoo-ins, too much speculation, and a general cornucopia of rumors, predictions and wishes.
But anyway, these are my pre-expo thoughts. As this post will have a very short shelf life, I'm not bothering with links or references. Use Google at your own discretion.
What's given
iLife '07 can't just be merely inferred from a pattern, it's been leaked brutally (by Amazon.com). iWork will almost certainly receive an update, too. Leopard and iTV are the rare things that Apple pre-announced, so some details will certainly follow. Of these two, the iTV doesn't create that much buzz, though it's yet another non-Mac product from Apple with a GUI and an OS of its own, and should thus warrant great interest as a significant player in the diversification of Apple.
Leopard
I think Leopard's Top Secret features are perhaps the most eagerly anticipated items in the keynote. Leopard will certainly be a developer's delight with Objective-C 2.0, Core Animation, greatly enhanced developer tools and other killer features, but the consumer appeal of the new OS itself may be lacking a bit in comparison to earlier Mac OS X upgrades, especially in light of the slower update cycle that debuts with Leopard (which will ship after an almost two-year wait over Tiger). By the way, I don't think Leopard will ship any earlier than the spring deadline Apple announced. It just doesn't seem ready yet.
Rumors suggest an updated GUI, though nobody knows whether this change (if true) would only be skin deep, or it would add new behaviors or change existing ones. I guess the iTunes look (i.e. gray window borders without textures, flat, matte scroll widgets, and a shiny 3D selection highlight among others) will become more widespread, at least this would be the least surprising development (and certainly a welcome one over the brushed metal look, though not necessarily suitable to replace current non-textured windows).
If the look and feel change, I certainly hope for the following:
- Hopefully, it won't be such a radical change that all icons, buttons and other custom graphics of third-party apps would need to be redone in order to avoid looking out of place. This was the case with the switch from Platinum to Aqua, and the transitional period wasn't pretty. Platinum icons on Aqua backgrounds looked decidedly horrible.
- I hope pinstripes will be gone for good.
- The ability to select a neutral gray color scheme (unlike the blue-biased Graphite theme) would be good for graphic designers.
I've been thinking a lot about the "top secret" features, and have considered various theories on why these have been kept secret. The official explanation has been to prevent premature copying by Microsoft, but many wondered what Microsoft could have copied in the few months between the WWDC and Vista's debut other than looks – and this has certainly helped the "new GUI look" rumor gain momentum.
However, I don't think Apple's fear of the Redmond copycats necessarily involved Microsoft looking at Leopard features in August and squeezing them into Vista in two months' time.
Instead, this is what I think this "fear from copying" might have involved:
- Announcing even difficult-to-copy features seven months before shipping, rather than only two months ahead, would give Microsoft five more months to catch up with these in a Service Pack release of Vista. Apple has bought itself five more months of market lead on these (still mysterious) features.
- Microsoft isn't the only company that copies Apple. With the advent of the so-called Web 2.0, rich web interfaces abound, and many Apple design trends already surface on new websites. Today, web applications sometimes approach the functionality of desktop apps, and their development and distribution can be very fast.
- Most likely, though, I suspect that at least some of the "Top Secret" features have something to do with as yet unannounced products, both hardware and software. Just one example: I think .Mac will be seriously revamped (the updated webmail client may be a hint of some progress going on behind the scenes), and just about everyone agrees that Dot-Mac sucks. The complaints have been going on for so long (and have yet to be addressed by Apple) that I'm sure something is happening by now. Oh, and of course, the iPod phone and the touchscreen iPod wil both use some extra tie-ins with Leopard.
Some Mac models will likely be updated. Eight-core Mac Pros do sound cool (c'mon, eight freakin' cores), even though the OS won't support them really, but come on, when did that particular problem stop Apple from releasing new pro hardware?
But frankly, who cares? If 2007 is going to be a great product year for Apple, I'd really like to see new things. Apple calls just about all of its years "great product years," with "exciting products down the pipeline," but these usually merely signify updated laptops, desktops and iPods with elegant, minimalist designs.
I actually hope that Mac updates will be a minor part of the keynote, or they may not even make it into the keynote.
Sonification ahead?
I mean, sure, it's great if the Mac Pro receives yet another update and gets even faster (prompting Phil Schiller to announce with genuine enthusiasm that "this is the fastest Mac ever," as if we were somehow expecting Macs to get slower every year), but still: there's only so much enthusiasm incremental updates, or even new form factors such as the Mac mini can create. I hope Apple is in a position today to become more like Sony, and diversify. Create new things. As in, mobile phones and PDAs. Apple-branded versions of these devices have been but a pipe dream for a long time, but not any more. The iPod phone is a given (though not necessarily at the Expo), and the iPod PDA is a possibility.
As it turns out, at least one of Apple's MWSF posters will tout the year 2007 (as does Apple's homepage). Will we see a(n unlikely) roadmap for the rest of the year, or will 2007 start with a bang? We'll see very soon.