Comments on: Why I Don’t Want An iPhone… http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/ Simon Brocklehurst's Technology Blog Sun, 23 Nov 2008 10:25:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Lally http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-125521 Lally Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:58:57 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-125521 3G will come. Steve's said so himself (it wasn't in this version b/c it killed the battery). Camera? that's likely to improve as apple has a chance to start tweaking the device. This is v1.0 Opening it up? Donno about that one. Apple has open (e.g. Java) moods and closed moods. Probably Steve defaults to closed unless someone convinces him of something else. Blackberry? When has apple *ever* worked well with enterprise needs? If they do push, it'll probably end up being through .Mac, but I doubt it. See below. Unlocked? Apple needed someone with experience in the phone market. Verizon didn't give them what they wanted, so they went with Ma Bell. Apple made a deal with her to get in the market, and they'll have to abide by it. In the mean time, they're building a brand and will later have the ability to leverage it. If that means unlocked, that'd be great -- but we'll see. Two possibilities: 1. As the locked ones are at unlocked prices, they could always go solo. Considering how they've been fighting record companies about iTunes pricing, they may go this way to sell more iPhones. (iTMS was never a profit center for apple, just a way to sell iPods). 2. Apple's getting a cut of the monthly fees. They may just offer the phone on all the major carriers and call it 'good enough.' Showing how many people switched to AT&T just for the iPhone should let them negotiate some revenue-sharing deals. 3G will come. Steve’s said so himself (it wasn’t in this version b/c it killed the battery).

Camera? that’s likely to improve as apple has a chance to start tweaking the device. This is v1.0

Opening it up? Donno about that one. Apple has open (e.g. Java) moods and closed moods. Probably Steve defaults to closed unless someone convinces him of something else.

Blackberry? When has apple *ever* worked well with enterprise needs? If they do push, it’ll probably end up being through .Mac, but I doubt it. See below.

Unlocked? Apple needed someone with experience in the phone market. Verizon didn’t give them what they wanted, so they went with Ma Bell. Apple made a deal with her to get in the market, and they’ll have to abide by it. In the mean time, they’re building a brand and will later have the ability to leverage it. If that means unlocked, that’d be great — but we’ll see.

Two possibilities:
1. As the locked ones are at unlocked prices, they could always go solo. Considering how they’ve been fighting record companies about iTunes pricing, they may go this way to sell more iPhones. (iTMS was never a profit center for apple, just a way to sell iPods).
2. Apple’s getting a cut of the monthly fees. They may just offer the phone on all the major carriers and call it ‘good enough.’ Showing how many people switched to AT&T just for the iPhone should let them negotiate some revenue-sharing deals.

]]> By: simon http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124582 simon Fri, 28 Sep 2007 15:35:03 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124582 <p>Mr X said,<br /> <i><br /> What’s the difference between an iPhone and an iTouch? Access to the phone network - pure and simple - that’s what defines a ‘phone’.<br /> </i><br /> Not quite. The truth is - the differences are more that. Apple has done the minimum with the iTouch that they could get away with; to try to encourage iPhone sales. iTouch has no camera. iTouch has no speakers (bit silly for a music player). iTouch has no email client.</p> <p>Re: IM. IM isn't a bandwidth hog. Plenty of mobile carriers allow IM clients to be installed on phones. And, if you pay for a high-end all-you-can eat data tarif, they'll let you do VOIP and video streaming too. If Apple chooses to do business exclusively with backward-looking carriers, that's their problem. Apple's business will suffer as a result.</p> <p>Apple needs to balance its natural desire for increasing revenues and profits (e.g. by selling the iPhone handset profitably as well as taking a 40% share of the monthly fee), with focussing relentlessly on the needs of their customers. It seems to me that they're in danger of swinging the needle away from the interests of their customers.... and if they do that, ultimately, it won't be good for their business.</p> Mr X said,

What’s the difference between an iPhone and an iTouch? Access to the phone network - pure and simple - that’s what defines a ‘phone’.

Not quite. The truth is - the differences are more that. Apple has done the minimum with the iTouch that they could get away with; to try to encourage iPhone sales. iTouch has no camera. iTouch has no speakers (bit silly for a music player). iTouch has no email client.

Re: IM. IM isn’t a bandwidth hog. Plenty of mobile carriers allow IM clients to be installed on phones. And, if you pay for a high-end all-you-can eat data tarif, they’ll let you do VOIP and video streaming too. If Apple chooses to do business exclusively with backward-looking carriers, that’s their problem. Apple’s business will suffer as a result.

Apple needs to balance its natural desire for increasing revenues and profits (e.g. by selling the iPhone handset profitably as well as taking a 40% share of the monthly fee), with focussing relentlessly on the needs of their customers. It seems to me that they’re in danger of swinging the needle away from the interests of their customers…. and if they do that, ultimately, it won’t be good for their business.

]]> By: Mr X http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124505 Mr X Fri, 28 Sep 2007 10:11:36 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124505 What's the difference between a iphone and an itouch? Access to the phone network - pure and simple - that's what defines a 'phone'. Therefore he can't make a 'phone' unless he keeps the networks sweet - that may change in the future - maybe they will bid for spectrum in the great digital switch over, or wireless truly becomes pervasive ( note Apple are very keen to do no toll data deals - suggests that's where they think the longer is ). Bearing this in mind - lets go through your list. Re: Killer 3-rd party apps. Off the top of my head. 1. Every retro game on the planet (Space Invaders, Defender, Galaxians, Pacman etc. etc.) Accept the games one - and so do Apple - they have worked with third parties on games even if they haven't opened it up entirely. 2. Usable instant messaging client that talks to all major IM platforms Keep networks sweet. 3. Free VOIP (a la Truphone, Skype etc) ` Keep networks sweet. 5. Video player that plays more formats than Apple’s video player does As you say they are interested in supporting flash - and have managed to push youtube to provide compatible content - they recognize this one - but they are also playing the 'promote' quicktime game. 6. ShoZu.com 7. Radar.net Fair enough - I think apple offers limited functionality via .mac - the interesting implementation detail here is that they do it via email - if radar.net and shozu.com also had email gateways then you could do it as well. 8. Google mobile applications (not just Google web services that Apple decides to write clients for) Fair enough - but surely these are just temporary things while a full browser is not available? 9. A client that talks to Exchange server over the air Only relevant for 40% of business users - no home users. Server-side solutions - anyway if MS opened the MAPI protocol as the EU have been asking for the last ten years, then it might be easier. 10. SSH client Come on - that's a nice niche. 11. Photo editor Killer? 12. Native Atom/RSS reader Don't understand why they removed the native reader in safari and put the online one on - it might be to aggregate polling and reduce network bandwidth in response to the networks fears. I summary the only killer ones I think you have on the list are 1, 2 & 3 - games they are addressing if slowly, 2&3 they can't yet as they need to keep the networks sweet - perhaps the biggest reason for excluding third party development is to stop these sort of apps being developed!!!! As for the comment about mainstream versus price - well price is the easiest thing to change - as they have already shown. What’s the difference between a iphone and an itouch? Access to the phone network - pure and simple - that’s what defines a ‘phone’.

Therefore he can’t make a ‘phone’ unless he keeps the networks sweet - that may change in the future - maybe they will bid for spectrum in the great digital switch over, or wireless truly becomes pervasive ( note Apple are very keen to do no toll data deals - suggests that’s where they think the longer is ).

Bearing this in mind - lets go through your list.

Re: Killer 3-rd party apps. Off the top of my head.

1. Every retro game on the planet (Space Invaders, Defender, Galaxians, Pacman etc. etc.)
Accept the games one - and so do Apple - they have worked with third parties on games even if they haven’t opened it up entirely.

2. Usable instant messaging client that talks to all major IM platforms

Keep networks sweet.

3. Free VOIP (a la Truphone, Skype etc)
`
Keep networks sweet.

5. Video player that plays more formats than Apple’s video player does

As you say they are interested in supporting flash - and have managed to push youtube to provide compatible content - they recognize this one - but they are also playing the ‘promote’ quicktime game.

6. ShoZu.com
7. Radar.net
Fair enough - I think apple offers limited functionality via .mac
- the interesting implementation detail here is that they do it via email - if radar.net and shozu.com also had email gateways then you could do it as well.

8. Google mobile applications (not just Google web services that Apple decides to write clients for)
Fair enough - but surely these are just temporary things while a full browser is not available?

9. A client that talks to Exchange server over the air
Only relevant for 40% of business users - no home users.
Server-side solutions - anyway if MS opened the MAPI protocol as the EU have been asking for the last ten years, then it might be easier.

10. SSH client
Come on - that’s a nice niche.

11. Photo editor
Killer?

12. Native Atom/RSS reader
Don’t understand why they removed the native reader in safari and put the online one on - it might be to aggregate polling and reduce network bandwidth in response to the networks fears.

I summary the only killer ones I think you have on the list are 1, 2 & 3 - games they are addressing if slowly, 2&3 they can’t yet as they need to keep the networks sweet - perhaps the biggest reason for excluding third party development is to stop these sort of apps being developed!!!!

As for the comment about mainstream versus price - well price is the easiest thing to change - as they have already shown.

]]> By: simon http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124498 simon Fri, 28 Sep 2007 09:12:42 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124498 <p>Mr X wrote:<br /> <i><br /> People want to - the sort of people that can hack phones or are perhaps to use a hack - I don’t think that’s the mainstream customer that Apple is gunning for.</i></p> <p>Don’t get me wrong as a developer I’d want the phone open - the question is will the majority of Apple customers care?</p> <p>These are really critical questions. I don't *know the answers. Here's what I *think* though...</p> <p>I don't think Apple *can* be gunning for "mainstream" customers with iPhone - the deal they are offering with iPhone is super-expensive compared to the competition. In other words, I doubt the average iPod customer is going to see iPhone as a good deal cf iPod which is a good-value product.</p> <p>If I'm right, then we will see slow sales of iPhone going forward, after the hardcore Apple fans have all got their iPhones. On the topic of hardcore fans, it's interesting that Apple seems not to care about these people e.g. see the current debacle over their deliberately breaking their customer's phones that have been modded. </p> <p>This looks like a massive PR disaster to me (much bigger than the recent price drop where Jobs had to backtrack and offer a $100 rebate) . I wonder if Steve is getting caught up in his own reality distortion field? Did he not *know* just how many of the iPhones Apple sold have been modded because the iPhone doesn't work the way the people that bought it wanted it to work? Did he not foresee that breaking so many of his customers phones would cause them to voice their unhapiness loudly for the whole world to see?</p> <p>Jobs sees this as a game of cat and mouse between Apple and the "hackers". I see this as more evidence of dumbness, making life difficult for some of his most important customers that evangelise his company's products. Talk about not getting it...</p> Mr X wrote:

People want to - the sort of people that can hack phones or are perhaps to use a hack - I don’t think that’s the mainstream customer that Apple is gunning for.

Don’t get me wrong as a developer I’d want the phone open - the question is will the majority of Apple customers care?

These are really critical questions. I don’t *know the answers. Here’s what I *think* though…

I don’t think Apple *can* be gunning for “mainstream” customers with iPhone - the deal they are offering with iPhone is super-expensive compared to the competition. In other words, I doubt the average iPod customer is going to see iPhone as a good deal cf iPod which is a good-value product.

If I’m right, then we will see slow sales of iPhone going forward, after the hardcore Apple fans have all got their iPhones. On the topic of hardcore fans, it’s interesting that Apple seems not to care about these people e.g. see the current debacle over their deliberately breaking their customer’s phones that have been modded.

This looks like a massive PR disaster to me (much bigger than the recent price drop where Jobs had to backtrack and offer a $100 rebate) . I wonder if Steve is getting caught up in his own reality distortion field? Did he not *know* just how many of the iPhones Apple sold have been modded because the iPhone doesn’t work the way the people that bought it wanted it to work? Did he not foresee that breaking so many of his customers phones would cause them to voice their unhapiness loudly for the whole world to see?

Jobs sees this as a game of cat and mouse between Apple and the “hackers”. I see this as more evidence of dumbness, making life difficult for some of his most important customers that evangelise his company’s products. Talk about not getting it…

]]> By: simon http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124460 simon Fri, 28 Sep 2007 06:20:22 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124460 Asam said, <i> "I think from what I’ve glanced over in the Mac press, Apple is making a distinction between unlocking and third-party apps."</i> Nope... http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2007/09/27/3rd-party-apps-disabled-in-iphone-1-1-1/ http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/steve-jobs-girds-for-the-long-iphone-war/ Asam said,

“I think from what I’ve glanced over in the Mac press, Apple is making a distinction between unlocking and third-party apps.”

Nope…

http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2007/09/27/3rd-party-apps-disabled-in-iphone-1-1-1/

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/steve-jobs-girds-for-the-long-iphone-war/

]]> By: Asam Bashir http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124301 Asam Bashir Thu, 27 Sep 2007 16:38:54 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124301 My main feature request relates to 'Share Mac' features of the new finder in Leopard (it's here soon) - I'd like to see this fully integrated into iPhone so that with the Remote Admin features you can take advantage of unlimited data access and use VNC like technology to display your Mac desktop on the iPhone. Even a simple implementation of existing cover-flow technology to browse your files on a Mac (via dot Mac) would be very useful - This however would make it even easier to hack the iPhone, so it would need a sophisiticated implementation. And yes, iChat - but that will wait till we have a front camera on iPhone 2.0.. My main feature request relates to ‘Share Mac’ features of the new finder in Leopard (it’s here soon) - I’d like to see this fully integrated into iPhone so that with the Remote Admin features you can take advantage of unlimited data access and use VNC like technology to display your Mac desktop on the iPhone. Even a simple implementation of existing cover-flow technology to browse your files on a Mac (via dot Mac) would be very useful - This however would make it even easier to hack the iPhone, so it would need a sophisiticated implementation.

And yes, iChat - but that will wait till we have a front camera on iPhone 2.0..

]]> By: Simon Brocklehurst http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124290 Simon Brocklehurst Thu, 27 Sep 2007 15:56:31 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124290 Re: a great implementation of Java for iPhone. Not trivial; but not rocket science either. I really hope Apple is getting on with this... but the rumour mill suggests they're more interested in Flash. So be it. Re: Killer 3-rd party apps. Off the top of my head. 1. Every retro game on the planet (Space Invaders, Defender, Galaxians, Pacman etc. etc.) 2. Usable instant messaging client that talks to all major IM platforms 3. Free VOIP (a la Truphone, Skype etc) 5. Video player that plays more formats than Apple's video player does 6. ShoZu.com 7. Radar.net 8. Google mobile applications (not just Google web services that Apple decides to write clients for) 9. A client that talks to Exchange server over the air 10. SSH client 11. Photo editor 12. Native Atom/RSS reader Re: a great implementation of Java for iPhone. Not trivial; but not rocket science either. I really hope Apple is getting on with this… but the rumour mill suggests they’re more interested in Flash. So be it.

Re: Killer 3-rd party apps. Off the top of my head.

1. Every retro game on the planet (Space Invaders, Defender, Galaxians, Pacman etc. etc.)

2. Usable instant messaging client that talks to all major IM platforms

3. Free VOIP (a la Truphone, Skype etc)

5. Video player that plays more formats than Apple’s video player does

6. ShoZu.com

7. Radar.net

8. Google mobile applications (not just Google web services that Apple decides to write clients for)

9. A client that talks to Exchange server over the air

10. SSH client

11. Photo editor

12. Native Atom/RSS reader

]]> By: Asam Bashir http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124283 Asam Bashir Thu, 27 Sep 2007 15:33:01 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124283 Just in case anyone missed it, the most excellent review by caMMac (http://cammac.org.uk) honorary and active member, http://www.stephenfry.com/blog/?p=3 Just in case anyone missed it, the most excellent review by caMMac (http://cammac.org.uk) honorary and active member,

http://www.stephenfry.com/blog/?p=3

]]> By: Asam Bashir http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124279 Asam Bashir Thu, 27 Sep 2007 15:17:27 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124279 Steve Jobs would be dumb if he wasn't making money, but he fact is he is, and the iPhone is selling very well - so at this stage, from a business perpective and not our personal geek inclinations, has he got it wrong? They're not going for the BB market just yet, we're in early days like the iPod v1.0. Keyboard: one word 'BlueTooth' - so many of the current iPhone 1.0 limitations could be addressed if Bluetooth was addressed properly. The relativity unsophisticated Bluetooth inomplementation in v1.0 seems to be a power saving compromise, so for version 2.0 there is huge potential when combined with sophisiticated power saving 3G chipsets. Even now with 1.0 though, all Apple has to do is enable use with the new razor thin Aluminium Bluetooth keyboard and it would make a lot of people happy. It's ironic that I can use my Nokia E65 with an Apple Bluetooth keyboard but I won't be able to do same with iPhone 1.0. Steve Jobs would be dumb if he wasn’t making money, but he fact is he is, and the iPhone is selling very well - so at this stage, from a business perpective and not our personal geek inclinations, has he got it wrong? They’re not going for the BB market just yet, we’re in early days like the iPod v1.0.

Keyboard: one word ‘BlueTooth’ - so many of the current iPhone 1.0 limitations could be addressed if Bluetooth was addressed properly. The relativity unsophisticated Bluetooth inomplementation in v1.0 seems to be a power saving compromise, so for version 2.0 there is huge potential when combined with sophisiticated power saving 3G chipsets.

Even now with 1.0 though, all Apple has to do is enable use with the new razor thin Aluminium Bluetooth keyboard and it would make a lot of people happy. It’s ironic that I can use my Nokia E65 with an Apple Bluetooth keyboard but I won’t be able to do same with iPhone 1.0.

]]> By: Mr X http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124246 Mr X Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:07:17 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/09/26/why-i-dont-want-an-iphone/#comment-124246 Ten million is a lot and then not that many if you look at the wider market. Aren't they planning to go past that in a single year? As you say it will be interesting to see if/when Apple surpass that. I think we are both agreed that on a small form factor device input is going to be a challenge however you do it for the foreseeable - heck input is an issue for desktops and they have acres of space. re: java - that's ok if you use the Java look and feel - but surely apple would want a native look at feel - how long would that take? Or maybe they would need to write a UI kit specifically - also they need to add the appropriate connectivity hooks - and how to they map gestures to the Java api? It's not totally straightforward. Sure developers want access - but do consumers care? Maybe I don't use phones enough to understand - perhaps you can help me by listing three killer 3rd party apps you'd like to see if it was opened up. Does anything other than games and ring tones make any real money on phones? I have no idea. People want to - the sort of people that can hack phones or are perhaps to use a hack - I don't think that's the mainstream customer that Apple is gunning for. Don't get me wrong as a developer I'd want the phone open - the question is will the majority of Apple customers care? Ten million is a lot and then not that many if you look at the wider market. Aren’t they planning to go past that in a single year? As you say it will be interesting to see if/when Apple surpass that.

I think we are both agreed that on a small form factor device input is going to be a challenge however you do it for the foreseeable - heck input is an issue for desktops and they have acres of space.

re: java - that’s ok if you use the Java look and feel - but surely apple would want a native look at feel - how long would that take? Or maybe they would need to write a UI kit specifically - also they need to add the appropriate connectivity hooks - and how to they map gestures to the Java api? It’s not totally straightforward.

Sure developers want access - but do consumers care? Maybe I don’t use phones enough to understand - perhaps you can help me by listing three killer 3rd party apps you’d like to see if it was opened up. Does anything other than games and ring tones make any real money on phones? I have no idea.

People want to - the sort of people that can hack phones or are perhaps to use a hack - I don’t think that’s the mainstream customer that Apple is gunning for.

Don’t get me wrong as a developer I’d want the phone open - the question is will the majority of Apple customers care?

]]>