Report: iPhone could make or break Apples bank

I suppose I can cross UBS off the list. If an iPhone sale means a "lost" iPod sale, then all that means is even more money for Apple. Besides, there's growing market pressure for more function convergence, if Apple can make it work, then that's another worthy market for them to tap. Apple also has plenty of money and is very profitable, so I don't see how iPhone development would have to mean hurting other divisions and other projects because they can hire more people to cover a new project, so I don't see how it has a strong chance of hurting the development of other products.

Everytime I read this... The fact is the iPhone doesn't replace the iPod or even the iPod nano. There's a lot of people out there still who don't want to have a cellphone or have to sign mutl year agreements...

If the iPhone eventually becomes flexible, so you can use any carrier, prepaid plans, etc... then it might be close to being bigger than the iPod. But the iPhone will likely have to be charged everyday... doesn't have as much storage as an iPod, it's bulkier than the nano. If they ever release a widescreen ipod with all the features of the iPhone except the phone part, I'd buy it... :)

I am tired of hearing the same old analyst's canard that company X's new product B is a mixed blessing because it might cannibalize sales of their other product A. This refrain has been played so often that people have started to believe it. The fact is, successful manufacturers are constantly seeking to cannibalize their own sales with new product because if they aren't doing it, then somebody else will beat them to it. Cannibalizing your own sales means that you're consistently developing new, more advanced, and more desirable products.

You want a company that doesn't do a good job of cannibalizing its own product? Take a look at Motorola and it's boom and bust cell phone cycle.

This is THE point. This what they said about the mini->nano transition. 'They're replacing such a successful product...' blah blah blah. This is another area the Apple really excels at the moment. They don't wait for a product to be on the decline and dragging them down to find 'the next great thing' they go ahead and find it beforehand. tundra is right, you want them to cannibalize their own sale, at the right time, and with something even better.

What the iPhone truly needs to succeed, in view of its obvious disadvantages (high price, limitation to Cingular, small memory for music/video, lack of voice dialing, etc.) is a KILLER APP.

Such an app could well be DICTATION-OCR SOFTWARE (since a microphone is already present, and a stripped down OS X) . . . software that would let a user dictate an outgoing Email, or dictate text that could go into a rudimentary word processor (like TEXTEDIT), and thence to a memory file or, by any one of several means, to a printer if desired.

Then that device, trademark issues permiting, could be renamed the POCKET MAC !

And then that software could well be incorporated into LEOPARD, which would give it the boost needed to stand out as more than a slight improvement over TIGER !

This is "anal-ysts" trying to talk the price back down to where they should have bought aapl, but didn't.
Apple doesn't sell iphones now, so if they sold zero iphones, they would be in the same financial situation they are now... looking great for Mac sales now that CS3 will be shipping, looking great for ipod sales because nothing can touch it (wait until the touch screen ipods!), looking great for software - Final Cut Studio gettin a great update at NAB (I didn't say nothin').
All in all, buy Apple stock now!

Apple is Doomed!!!!!

:lol:

Oh and it doesn't make coffee or walk the dog either, :(

I assume your Samsung has Safari running along with Address Book, Listen to voice mail in any order feature, touch controls and all the other zillion new things iPhone does have then? :rolleyes:

No but I don't think I'd be able to use that while driving anyway. I buy everything Apple and that short coming won't stop me from buying one but it will not replace a cell phone that has voice dialing. I just can't get by without it. Did I mention I really really need voice dialing.

I think there is no doubt that the iPhone sales will to some extent replace iPod sales as iPhone owners realize that they have no need for an additional device in the form of the iPod.

Customers moving to a different, newer product from the same company as such does not affect profits as long as number of customers, units per customer, and margins are at least maintained (and Apple seems very capable of achieving and surpassing these targets).

The main concern I would see, that having to deal with network operators, their tie-ins, their mandatory contracts, and their subsidies of handsets might mess up Apple's operational freedom such as to reduce their ability to sell ever higher number of devices at generous margins.

I think there is no doubt that the iPhone sales will to some extent replace iPod sales as iPhone owners realize that they have no need for an additional device in the form of the iPod.

The iPhone is only a viable replacement/substitute for the shuffle or nano - not the 'real' iPods with HD's It just hasn't got enough capacity.

Ok you are forgiven :)
Thinking about this further ... this is a Mac of sorts, hard to believe some bright spark won't add this feature later.

ummm, at the risk of flogging the proverbial deceased equine, its not released (nor probably even feature frozen) yet. We don't know what is or isn't in the final release.

As for killer app, does any phone have 'personal blacklisting'?
Voice spammer burns me once, but with one click I prevent future calls from even getting to my voicemail. Seems simple enough, and boy, would I love that.

ummm, at the risk of flogging the proverbial deceased equine, its not released (nor probably even feature frozen) yet. We don't know what is or isn't in the final release.

As for killer app, does any phone have 'personal blacklisting'?
Voice spammer burns me once, but with one click I prevent future calls from even getting to my voicemail. Seems simple enough, and boy, would I love that.

I think you answered your second paragraph with your first ;)

The iPhone is only a viable replacement/substitute for the shuffle or nano - not the 'real' iPods with HD's It just hasn't got enough capacity.

Maybe some but not many. [...] Maybe one day when an iPhone has a massive storage capacity?

I absolutely agree. Mainly nano user might consider leaving their nanos at home and only travel with their iPhone. I was thinking longer term when iPhones had a large enough capacity.

The only reason why I might not get an iPhone right away (apart from money) is its size. My cellphone is always in my trousers pocket, in order for me to be able to notice the vibrational alarm. As long as their are cell-phones smaller than an iPhone, I guess I will prefer them. Once the iPhone shrinks to the size of the nano, I'll definitely get one, regardless of price.

They really might not want to take their $500 iPhone out on the bike trail for some blading... when they could take a relatively cheap, unobtrusive Shuffle instead.

And another phone? Some people originally bought their first mobile phone partly because they want something in case of roadside emergencies in their car. If you take a nasty fall in a secluded part of a park, then one might want a phone to take along. While we're at it, any phone that plays music can be good enough if it just needs to make a call and play tunes.

Just wait until all of the major auto companies start talking about iPhone integration.. :lol:

BMW has already mentioned it. They should have it by the time the iPhone ships. As for the other manufacurers and 3rd-party stereo manufactuers, it won't be hard to do since the dongle is exactly the same. Just a software change, which I'm sure Apple is more than willing to help out with.

PS: Has anyone heard of Zune integration in cars? Iam getting ahead of myself here, I should be asking if anyone even knows someone with a Zune. :D

BMW has already mentioned it. They should have it by the time the iPhone ships. As for the other manufacurers and 3rd-party stereo manufactuers, it won't be hard to do since the dongle is exactly the same. Just a software change, which I'm sure Apple is more than willing to help out with.

Was there any change at all? The most I can think of is maybe adding more functionality, but I'd think that existing units should work just fine if Apple was smart enough to keep backwards compatibility. If I spent hundreds of dollars on iPod integration, I would not want to spend hundreds more just to make the existing system work with a new device in the same product line.

I think the Russians have put together a Lada with Zune.
And I here that the French have put together a Renault and a Zune.

Was there any change at all? The most I can think of is maybe adding more functionality, but I'd think that existing units should work just fine if Apple was smart enough to keep backwards compatibility. If I spent hundreds of dollars on iPod integration, I would not want to spend hundreds more just to make the existing system work with a new device in the same product line.
I would hope so, but since it uses a different OS I have no way of knowing if they were able to keep it that simple. I've considered that they found it easier to make all the software changes in iTunes instead of altering how the iPhones transmits/recieves audio info.

....

The headline suggests the the iPhone has the potential to bankrupt Apple. That's absurd at face value.

Yeah, it is odd. Mac CPU sales up 72% year over year in March, and an iPhone that doesn't perform well will sink Apple to the bottom of the barrel. Jeesh.

Lets see, I have 3-4 functioning Mac laptops and a couple desktops (if a Mac Mini qualifies). Then I have a couple iPods (not counting the ones I've given away). iPods can be used for so many things that a cellphone is not going to get me to dump the iPods. In fact, I may get a Shuffle just for audio books/podcasts when traveling.

I really think some of these analysts spend too much time talking to other analysts rather than finding out how people REALLY use technology.

For me and other people I have talked to about the iPhone, the main reason to buy an iPhone has NOTHING whatever to do with SONGS!

iPhone represents the clean integration between a Mac and the Internet capability that has people stoked. Secondly with the prospect of communcations & computing power in your pocket on little applications means that you can leave your laptop at home or work during lunch.

Cpu sales are up 72% since last March? Where are you getting your numbers from? Apple hasn't even announced the numbers yet.

You want a company that doesn't do a good job of cannibalizing its own product? Take a look at Motorola and it's boom and bust cell phone cycle.

I'm just wondering - how many people out there currently have either a smartphone or a phone that has "decent" music playback features, AS WELL AS an iPod? Chances are, there's a good piece of the market that will end up having an iPod (especially once the widescreen iPod comes out) as well as an iPhone. They're similar devices, and there will likely be some cannibalization, but I don't think it'll be significant.

Besides, do these "analysts" REALLY think that Steve didn't consider this yet?

What is being said here doesn't make sense, as many others have mentioned. Here's a few simple reasons why.

1) If you cannabilize one of your other products with one that makes you more money, then you are doing your job. If you do it with one that makes you less money, then you have problems. Cannabilization can hurt you if a lower margin product eats away at your higher margin products. I mean geez, is this stuff really that hard for analyst to figure out?

2) As stated, they expect the iPhone to maybe gain 1% of the mobile phone market? Doesn't that like leave 99% of the mobile phone market as potential iPod customers even if you make the poor assumption that every iPhone customer won't buy an iPod? How do they lose here, because the only way they could eat away more iPod market share is to grow the 1% to so 5%, and if they do that (which they won't) then they'll nearly own the world.

Am I missing something here?

IQ78

Well said. The term is UP-SELL. Marketing folks know it, you should too. iPods are commodity items with commodity profit margins. Apple is looking to increase their profit margins while expanding the total market size. Everyone has a cell phone. If apple can deliver on the hype, they will have a market leading high profit high volume phone. Win-win-win.

This isn't any underpants-gnome marketing plan. Apple want to sell to a larger market and cell phones are where it's at.

The UBS specialist used this reasoning to justify issuing a "hold" rating on the stock, as the promise of the future gadget was offset by its potentially volatile side-effects.

I am tired of hearing the same old analyst's canard that company X's new product B is a mixed blessing because it might cannibalize sales of their other product A. This refrain has been played so often that people have started to believe it. The fact is, successful manufacturers are constantly seeking to cannibalize their own sales with new product because if they aren't doing it, then somebody else will beat them to it. Cannibalizing your own sales means that you're consistently developing new, more advanced, and more desirable products.

You want a company that doesn't do a good job of cannibalizing its own product? Take a look at Motorola and it's boom and bust cell phone cycle.

BINGO! You hit the nail exactly on the head.

And you're right, it is SO very tiresome to hear some idiot analyst get panicky because Apple is doing the EXACT RIGHT THING here. While it's very debatable as to what extent the iPhone will cannibalize iPod sales (my guess is 'not that much', especially once a touchscreen 6G iPod comes out), it's crystal clear, as you state, that if Apple didn't cannibalize it's own products, someone else would do it for them. Duhhh, analysts. :rolleyes:

The sad thing? If Apple DIDN'T come out with the iPhone, we'd likely have this exact same UBS halfwit crying about how Apple is "blind to threat of multifunction devices" and we'd be hearing about how music cellphones are going to eat the iPod's lunch. In fact, we WERE hearing that before the iPhone was announced. So to cry about iPhone potentially hurting Apple is just dumb, REALLY dumb 'analysis'. :err:

I personally am all too happy to point out when Apple's straying off the path, but this is so obviously not one of those times. The iPhone had to be made, so that Apple had a presence in both dedicated players and multifunction devices, and Apple created a damn good, game-changing product, every bit the equal of the iPod. Just ask Motorola, Nokia, Samsung, Microsoft, and all the others that are scrambling to respond to it.

I put a 'Hold' on accepting any more advice this particular UBS dumbass. :(

PS- The AppleInsider headline ("iPhone could make or break Apple's bank") was also overstated and sensationalist. Don't get too desperate for hits, guys.

http://michelemiller.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/dumb_people_jpeg.jpg

.

And I here that the French have put together a Renault and a Zune.

I would hope so, but since it uses a different OS I have no way of knowing if they were able to keep it that simple. I've considered that they found it easier to make all the software changes in iTunes instead of altering how the iPhones transmits/recieves audio info.

The iPhone actually has an emulation layer built in; it emulates the pixio stuff. Rest easy. All taken care of.

The iPhone actually has an emulation layer built in; it emulates the pixio stuff. Rest easy. All taken care of.

If we weren't talking about an Apple product, I wouldn't be taking your word at face value.

it is reported that battery life is a bit on the low side (40 min). Why? power loss (static leak)? LCD driven to black all the time? Is the phone hot? (shouldn't be if it is handheld)...any idea? thx.

The iPhone will have voice dialing. Cingular offers voice dialing through an online server access. You just speed dial *8 (or say voice dial) and you asked to speak the person's name and phone number (mobile, work, home or whatever). The address book info is updated on their website. The information can be uploaded or updated by exporting the data from Address Book to the site.

Pretty nice feature. Hopefully they'll improve upon the updating feature before iPhone arives - it's a little cumbersome.

Early adopters will pay he full whack price but that will only be a few.

Unless the price comes down significantly the iphone will flop and they wont even meet half their target let alone 1%.

Early adopters will pay he full whack price but that will only be a few.

Unless the price comes down significantly the iphone will flop and they wont even meet half their target let alone 1%.

Sorry. But that's crap. I've talked to WAY too many people I know personally who can't wait to buy the iPhone.

And the price is never going drop. The features and capacity will continue to rise in order to keep the pricing the same. Have iPods really ever dropped in price? It was $400 when it debuted and it's $400 today. That's always been Apple's M.O.

Just because you're broke and can't afford one doesn't mean you should whine about it.

Anything written about Apple in The Inquirer or by John Dvorak about Apple should be taken with a ton of salt. Dvorak has admitted to writing negative things about Apple for the attention.

Dvorak is a putz. He's like the Ann Coulter of tech.

Dvorak is a putz. He's like the Ann Coulter of tech.

No, he's not that bad. He hasn't gotten near the point of writing a book on how to talk to Mac users or books suggesting that Mac users are a conspiracy of evil.

I think the problem is that too many Mac users were painting targets onto themselves by having this psychological need to defend their platform whenever it's being ridiculed. Anyone that wants page hits can just write a story ridiculing the platform and the page hits just roll in when dozens of mac sites link to it. I don't think Dvorak can be faulted too much for exploiting those that make themselves so easily exploitable.

Dont assume what I can and cant afford. You only go to make yourself look childish and demeaning. (and dumb)

Go to a forum for younger iphone fans and when you learn some manners then come back here.

That's Nancy Fohring's opinion. Nothing more. And you were comletely flippant in your original position as well. So there's plenty of 'tude to go around. Early adopters a "whack"?

I've been around here a helluva lot longer than you have. You better grow a thicker skin if you want to last.

"Nancy GohringFri Feb 23, 11:47 AM . Consumers aren't willing to pay what Apple may ask for the iPhone, but if the price drops they'll switch their mobile service to AT&T in order to get it, according to results of a survey released Thursday. Online market research firm Compete Inc. surveyed 379 people in the U.S.,.....

I'm going to have to rant yet again about shoddy journalism. The Nancy Gohring article quoted by bavlondon2 is one more example. As I read her article, my thoughts were similar to those expressed very well by David Demaree in his article entitled Damned Lies Redux. The title is a reference to the well-known saying which was part of a phrase attributed to Benjamin Disraeli and popularized in the U.S. by Mark Twain: There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics. The semi-ironic statement refers to the persuasive power of numbers, and succinctly describes how even accurate statistics can be used to bolster inaccurate arguments.

Since Demaree articulates my thoughts so well, I'll just let his words speak for themselves.

http://practicalmadness.com/2007/02/damned_lies_red

Please. Does Dvorak really need apologists? He's a douche and he probably knows he's a douche... he just doesn't care. :(

Yes, Mac fans do set themselves up to be exploited by his ilk, but even so, if you do the exploiting, you're still a douche. Degree of difficulty in doing the exploiting doesn't really figure into it, it's the act that counts. :\

No, I don't think that he he really cares. The problem here is that trolling Mac users is so easy and profitable that the only way to change his behavior is convince Mac users to not take the bait so easily.

No, I don't think that he he really cares. The problem here is that trolling Mac users is so easy and profitable that the only way to change his behavior is convince Mac users to not take the bait so easily.

Precisely!

No, I don't think that he he really cares. The problem here is that trolling Mac users is so easy and profitable that the only way to change his behavior is convince Mac users to not take the bait so easily.
That's an impossibility. Dvorak's trolling technique (which isn't even brilliant, btw, a nine-year old could do much the same thing) will always work on any platform, product, etc. that has a passionate user base.

For Dvorak's trolling not to work, Mac users would have to not be passionate about Macs. It's the inherent downside of having products that you actually really like and enjoy using.

As lame as Dvorak's doucebag antics are, it'd be infinitely worse if they provoked no response whatsoever. :wow:

.

Good points there. Lets hope for their sake they do. Although does the 2 year contract mean that Apple wont have a sucessor to the iphone for 2 years?

I hope the iphone has other basic feaures found in most phones such as being able to play 3gp/mp4 as well as video recording on the camera. As you lot are lucky to get it first when do you expect to see the full specs for it?

More importantaly when will it be FCC approved?

That's an impossibility. Dvorak's trolling technique (which isn't even brilliant, btw, a nine-year old could do much the same thing) will always work on any platform, product, etc. that has a passionate user base.

For Dvorak's trolling not to work, Mac users would have to not be passionate about Macs. It's the inherent downside of having products that you actually really like and enjoy using.

No, that's the downside of being so personally invested in a computer. An insult against the computer is taken as a personal insult. It's stupid to do, regardless of platform. One thing that is not Dvorak's fault is people that don't want to become emotionally or mentally mature enough to know how to avoid being troll-baited like that.

As lame as Dvorak's doucebag antics are, it'd be infinitely worse if they provoked no response whatsoever. :wow:

I disagree, I think the causality is the reverse. If he's ignored, then he will go away or write about something else instead. In contrast, giving him vitriol and multiplying page hits will encourage him to do it again and more often. Dvorak has absolutely no reason to break this loop. He doesn't care what you or I think unless it hits him in the pocket book. I think this adage fits: "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me...".

Good points there. Lets hope for their sake they do. Although does the 2 year contract mean that Apple wont have a sucessor to the iphone for 2 years?

I hope the iphone has other basic feaures found in most phones such as being able to play 3gp/mp4 as well as video recording on the camera. As you lot are lucky to get it first when do you expect to see the full specs for it?

More importantaly when will it be FCC approved?
I don't recall reading anything about Apple's contract with ATT that would prevent them from releasing other iPhone models... only that any iPhones made by Apple over the next 2 years will be ATT/Cingular exclusives in the US. If anyone has any info contrary to that, please pipe up.

Far as FCC approval goes, this is a good page to watch for it on. The iPhone is not listed yet, so we're still waiting, apparently:

http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/new.php?m=f

.

I don't recall reading anything about Apple's contract with ATT that would prevent them from releasing other iPhone models... only that any iPhones made by Apple over the next 2 years will be ATT/Cingular exclusives in the US. If anyone has any info contrary to that, please pipe up.

Far as FCC approval goes, this is a good page to watch for it on. The iPhone is not listed yet, so we're still waiting, apparently:

I tend to agree with the Appleinsider link below. The deal is probably a 5 year exclusive deal.
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2447 (http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:KgBbVhMTNUYJ:www.appleinsider.com/article.php%3Fid%3D2447+cingular+iPhone+5+year+dea l+appleinsider&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us)

PS: I'm surprised that the FCC approval hasn't gone through yet.

I tend to agree with the Appleinsider link below. The deal is probably a 5 year exclusive deal.
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2447 (http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:KgBbVhMTNUYJ:www.appleinsider.com/article.php%3Fid%3D2447+cingular+iPhone+5+year+dea l+appleinsider&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us)

I dunno... some analysts seem to have a different take on it:

Will The iPhone Be Available Through Other Carriers?
Apple and Cingular have inked a multi-year exclusive contract for the iPhone. However, it is unclear whether this deal applies to this iPhone model only or all future models released throughout the duration of the contract. We believe Apple will release new iPhone models quickly (as the company has with the iPod) and these devices will eventually be open to other wireless carriers, possibly even before the Cingular contract expires. With this expansion to other carriers comes expansion of the addressable market beyond Cingular's 58m subscribers. Certainly Apple will use other carriers abroad; the company indicated that it plans to expand iPhone distribution to Europe in the Q4 of FY07 quarter and to Asia in FY08. Apple will need to develop other versions of the iPhone for these markets (CDMA, etc.), which the company will likely also sell to other U.S. wireless carriers just after or even before the exclusive deal with Cingular ends.

http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2452

There does seem to be some confusion here. My guess? The details of deal have been kept intentionally vague. so that Cingular/ATT can put one spin on it while Apple puts another. Kinda like most political treaties. :lol:

.

I don't buy that logic as it would completely make the exclusive deal with AT&T pointless if Apple could release a nearly identical iPhone with a different model number. I'd bet money that Cingular gets exclusive rights to the US market for a set amount of years regardless of changes made to the iPhone line.
I'd agree with you, except for the fact that Cingular/ATT has been so very careful to avoid spelling out their agreement with Apple in detail. Seems like if they really did have a five-year lock on all US-released Apple phones, period, no questions asked, they would've announced it by now.

Perhaps at a press conference with a giant banner backdrop that says, "Ha ha Verizon. Neener neener neener." 8-)

Methinks that since that hasn't happened, there's some kind of loophole in there somewhere, or perhaps it's not as long a term as ATT wanted to give the impression of it being. Remember, Stevie has a somewhat notorious history of making agreements his way.

.

You do make some valid points.

1) Jobs is a shrewd deal maker and the terms always favor Apple more.
2) If I were CIngular and thought I may lose potential customers if they thought they could wait out the 2 years with there current carrier until the offer the iPhone I may let them know.
Yeah. Something just smells funny, y'know? ;)

Let's just say I won't be utterly shocked if 2009 rolls around and I can use some form of iPhone on Sprint or Verizon.

.

The only problem with that is that Apple would have to commit to produce CDMA versions as well.

CDMA is more power hungery than GSM, even though I;'m on Sprint.

If you go to PhoneScoop, and compare phones that have both versions, you will find that the CDMA versions have less talk and standby battery life. That could be a problem for a phone with both Bluetooth and WiFi.
Apple will eventually have to make a CDMA version in any case... while GSM is much more popular overseas, CDMA is the most popular technology in the US. And Cingular/ATT, big as it is, is only a bit more than 25% of the US wireless market.

Yep, CDMA is more power-hungry than GSM. But it has distinct advantages over GSM as well (soft handoffs, greater tower capacity, a generally greater tolerance for weak signals, and if all else is equal probably a lower likelihood of dropping the call... despite what Cingular says in its ads). Its limitations re: power consumption haven't prevented phonemakers from coming out with CDMA versions of their phones, even power-hungry 3G phones. The RAZR would be a good example.

And, if you think about it, it's probably helpful that we won't see a CDMA version 'til at least 2009. Gives Apple a chance to fine-tune the power management, and potentially use better battery technology as well (Li-polymer, Silver-zinc, Li-sulphur).

Far as PhoneScoop goes, I used to practically live there. Very good site, though if you check out the carrier forums there, have your BS filter on- a LOT of cellphone salesmen and fanbois hang out there, and of course THEIR carrier and/or favorite phone maker can do no wrong. :rolleyes:

I also highly recommend HowardForums, which tends to be slightly more polite. :)

.

Whats wrong with Lithium Polymer? I thought that type battery was good?

Anyway people what do you think the chances are of more "gestures" being available when the phone is released.

I prefer CDMA to GSM. I'm just trying to find a reason why Apple may not choose to come out with one. The reason is that there has already been criticism of the stated talk time, and the fact that a standby time hasn't even been given. The fact that both would be even shorter with CDMA could be a stumbling block. Otherwise, I think CDMA is superior to GSM in most every way. The other issues are less tangible to most folks though. Dropped calls are more likely to be blamed on the carrier than on the method of transmission.

How much of the battery's life is due to the phone radio, as in, how much would it really change?

Standby time is not really a problem for my CDMA phone, I never turn it off, it never dies and I only charge it once a week. The phone's battery is also three years old, but for some reason, the effective talk time is reduced a lot, but the standby time hasn't changed much.

How much of the battery's life is due to the phone radio, as in, how much would it really change?

Standby time is not really a problem for my CDMA phone, I never turn it off, it never dies and I only charge it once a week. The phone's battery is also three years old, but for some reason, the effective talk time is reduced a lot, but the standby time hasn't changed much.

You only charge it once a week? May i ask what phone you use?

Whats wrong with Lithium Polymer? I thought that type battery was good?

Anyway people what do you think the chances are of more "gestures" being available when the phone is released.

I too am under the mpression that Li-Poly is better than Li-Ion. I've read that it has about 10-12% longer output for the same size battery and it can be formed into more irregular shapes so the battery can be designed around the phone instead of the other way around.

Some info on this wold be great.

In all seriousness does it really matter. You know what he iphone looks like so whats the point in duscussing the possible shape of the phone in respect to the battery. Li Po is better than Li ion in terns of usage. All major companies use Li Po these days in all their new products. I think all Nokia n ranges do as do SE's.

Although what concerns me is that no standby time was ever given for the iphone only a talk(usage) time. This either means its very poor or Apple are trying to make it better.

I prefer CDMA to GSM. I'm just trying to find a reason why Apple may not choose to come out with one. The reason is that there has already been criticism of the stated talk time, and the fact that a standby time hasn't even been given. The fact that both would be even shorter with CDMA could be a stumbling block.
You may be overthinking it, Mel. :\

Remember, Cingular/ATT wasn't the first carrier Apple offered the iPhone to... Verizon was. Which would've necessitated a CDMA iPhone. I don't think Apple would've entered into serious negotiations with Verizon unless they could deliver a CDMA iPhone that would be well-received by the market, and part of that includes having acceptable talk and standby times (even on the GSM iPhone, talk time was mentioned during the Stevenote).

In fact, the above makes me wonder... were the very first iPhone prototypes actually CDMA then? They would've had to show Verizon something, I think. Hmm... :err:

.

Even if Apple chose CDMA in the US, they would have to chose GSM outside North America.
Which really isn't a big deal. CDMA technology is mature, inexpensive, and well understood. It's not difficult at all to make a phone in both CDMA and GSM 'flavors'... the RAZR is, for example.

1. Wanting to only get in bed with AT&T means that they can work with only one company and only one phone build in the US. Less time and money spent working out the logistics of the creating new interoperability between hardware and network services.
Again, it's not really a large hurdle. Motorola doesn't seem to have any problem cranking out both GSM and CDMA RAZRs for the US market, in fact, they're happy to, since the US market is split almost 50-50 between CDMA and GSM (with CDMA being a bit ahead) and doing so effectively doubles their revenues here.

At some point, Apple will have to make a CDMA iPhone if they really truly want to cash in on the US market. Cingular/ATT is only a little more than 25% of the US market... would not Apple want to eventually sell to the entire market? This is one of the things that makes me think that the exclusivity clause of the Apple-ATT contract either has loopholes for new models or is of a shorter duration than ATT is giving the impression of it being.

2. If I were in Jobs position I'd start negotiations will all the major competitors of the company I really wanted to pair with in order to strengthen my bargaining position.
Perhaps, but here's the thing... what if Verizon had said "Yes."? What does Steve say then? "Um... err... just kidding. Heh." :rolleyes:

I think it's more realistic to believe that Jobs had a Plan A (Verizon, whom he approached first) and a Plan B (ATT/Cingular), and he was only too happy to play them off against one another in order to secure better terms for Apple. But he was likely prepared to go with either. If you think about it, these two carriers were the only realistic partners for Apple in the US market, what with the only other potentials being T-Mobile (too small) and Sprint-Nextel (going through merger hell, generally underperforming, and in the midst of a not-fun major technology migration from iDEN to CDMA for its Nextel customers).

Basically, Jobs shopped the iPhone to 'everyone who made sense' in the US. Since the technological hurdles of making both a CDMA and a GSM version aren't high, it's logical to assume that he was willing to go with whomever came closer to meeting his terms, i.e. whomever needed the iPhone more. That was ATT.

3. Verizon's remarks about the iPhone had a bit of a "sour grapes" rings to me.
Of course. Jobs gave them a shot at it, but on terms that Verizon wasn't willing to agree to, and now its in the hands of Verizon's #1 competitor, who's going to club them over the head with it mercilessly until and unless Verizon gets their own version, which even in a best case scenario won't be for awhile.

They're also pissed because they're used to a world in which the carriers have always told the phonemakers what they want and the phonemakers then jump to it (even majors like Nokia and Motorola). The carriers had the power, the control. Apple went directly in the face of that, and Verizon was just not used to it. I can only imagine what the negotiations must've been like: :lol:

http://home.xnet.com/~cmaddox/you_want_it_when.jpg
You want WHAT again, Steve?

They probably ain't laughing now. 8-)

.

That's Nancy Fohring's opinion. Nothing more. And you were comletely flippant in your original position as well. So there's plenty of 'tude to go around. Early adopters a "whack"?

I've been around here a helluva lot longer than you have. You better grow a thicker skin if you want to last.

Noob. Typical American trying to talk technology. No wonder you lot get crap majority of the time when it comes to phones lol.

Is there even HSDPA yet in the states? lol

Of course, everyone remembers that Apple has a lot of cash in the bank. They just might start to buy up wireless in the same way that Deutsche Telecom (T-Mobile) did in the US and keep all the profits at Apple. It could happen... slowly I turn...

[QUOTE=solipsism;1067085]
Even if Apple chose CDMA in the US, they would have to chose GSM outside North America.[/ quote]
Which really isn't a big deal. CDMA technology is mature, inexpensive, and well understood. It's not difficult at all to make a phone in both CDMA and GSM 'flavors'... the RAZR is, for example.

Again, it's not really a large hurdle. Motorola doesn't seem to have any problem cranking out both GSM and CDMA RAZRs for the US market, in fact, they're happy to, since the US market is split almost 50-50 between CDMA and GSM (with CDMA being a bit ahead) and doing so effectively doubles their revenues here.

At some point, Apple will have to make a CDMA iPhone if they really truly want to cash in on the US market. Cingular/ATT is only a little more than 25% of the US market... would not Apple want to eventually sell to the entire market? This is one of the things that makes me think that the exclusivity clause of the Apple-ATT contract either has loopholes for new models or is of a shorter duration than ATT is giving the impression of it being.

Perhaps, but here's the thing... what if Verizon had said "Yes."? What does Steve say then? "Um... err... just kidding. Heh." :rolleyes:

I think it's more realistic to believe that Jobs had a Plan A (Verizon, whom he approached first) and a Plan B (ATT/Cingular), and he was only too happy to play them off against one another in order to secure better terms for Apple. But he was likely prepared to go with either. If you think about it, these two carriers were the only realistic partners for Apple in the US market, what with the only other potentials being T-Mobile (too small) and Sprint-Nextel (going through merger hell, generally underperforming, and in the midst of a not-fun major technology migration from iDEN to CDMA for its Nextel customers).

Basically, Jobs shopped the iPhone to 'everyone who made sense' in the US. Since the technological hurdles of making both a CDMA and a GSM version aren't high, it's logical to assume that he was willing to go with whomever came closer to meeting his terms, i.e. whomever needed the iPhone more. That was ATT.

Of course. Jobs gave them a shot at it, but on terms that Verizon wasn't willing to agree to, and now its in the hands of Verizon's #1 competitor, who's going to club them over the head with it mercilessly until and unless Verizon gets their own version, which even in a best case scenario won't be for awhile.

They're also pissed because they're used to a world in which the carriers have always told the phonemakers what they want and the phonemakers then jump to it (even majors like Nokia and Motorola). The carriers had the power, the control. Apple went directly in the face of that, and Verizon was just not used to it. I can only imagine what the negotiations must've been like. :lol:

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.xnet.com/you_want_it_when.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.xnet.com/~cmaddox&h=156&w=313&sz=23&hl=en&start=17&um=1&tbnid=bHd4BH_aY90LdM:&tbnh=58&tbnw=117&prev=/images%3Fq%3D%2522you%2Bwant%2Bit%2Bwhen%2522%26sv num%3D10%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26client% 3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DN
You want WANT again, Steve?

They probably ain't laughing now. 8-)

.

Of course, it could just of easily been the other way around. Cingular/ATT could have been plan "A", and Verison been plan "B".

If Cingular didn't play ball, they could have gone with Verison, but as Cingular did, they didn't have to.

It's also possible that once Cingular said yes, and with the required exclusivity given, they then COULDN'T have gone to Verison as well. It could be that Apple simply stopped serious negotiations, and Verison broke it off.

I've seen this tactic in business before. You don't always want to be seen as the one breaking off negotiations. This way you can always go back later and say; "We wanted to play ball, but you guys weren't interested.".

Has anyone seen this? 40 mins battery life, what a rubbish phone this will turn out to be if thats true.

http://theappleblog.com/2007/04/04/dvorak-iphone-battery-dead-after-40-minutes/

First mistake was indeed having a fixed battery.

I also don't feel compoftable with the source. I find it hard to believe that at this stage of manufacture that this could occur.

When we design a product, we know pretty much what the power consumption each of the components requires. We can fairly easily calculate the total power consumption of the device, with a certain percentage of error. That error could be 25%, even possibly, a bit more. If so, we go back and check to see that everything meets spec. If there is a design problem causing it, we can fix that.

But if this were true, then it would mean that the spec is off by 400%, an impossible number.

The only way that could happen is if the batteries themselves had some problem with self discharge, or a major problem existed in the design, which just doesn't seem to be possible now.

As previously reported on this thread, right from his own own mouth, Dvorak speaks out on YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOHzHVF-4Mg

So you think the comments regarding the iphones battery is completley untrue? For all prospective iphone owners im sure we all hope so.