iPhone: 6/29/07, Will it live up to the hype?

Ha!

Maddox in true form.I'm still betting on the apple interface and technology as a winner in the long run.

But now I may have to rethink my scheme a little.
I am as annoyed as many others with apples frequent announcements, but that is just a sign of constant innovation - what other company changes their menu so often? not even McDonald's can switch their menu as fast as apple.

http://www.apple.com/ipodtouch/guidedtour/




The new iPod touch looks cool though, so I may just get a new phone (a nokia since I am sick of my motorola e815 - I keep pushing buttons accidentally on that small thing - anyone else have this problem?) and the ipod touch this Christmas after the glitches get worked out...

Its so funny that apple dropped the price of the iphones also (and offered $100 store rebates). The question I have about the ipod tough is, will it be possible to scroll through music without looking at your ipod? Can the 1 button be programmable? When I am jogging in the park with this thing on my armband or pocket....a remote perhaps? they may have to address this with a software upgrade if they have not already.

I also wonder how the battery life is on this thing.
But the Why-fi and internet surfing means music downloads, skype IM, itunes and downloads, email, Brooklynian from a cafe - and no need for a laptop! That is pretty cool - even if you hate Apple.

The Starbucks + Apple deal is a little sleazy (in a corporate sense) but damned if it isn't smart. I am looking forward to the day I can have access to my entire music collection wirelessly. That is what will make the smaller 16GB flash drive less of an issue for me and I think this is the next logical step in digital music.

If I can check my hotmail and bank account securely...why not listen to my music securely online?

The future is looking bright.

alafairnadia wrote: [quote=BigGuy]Apparently someone likes the Nokia E70 a whole lot more than the iPhone:

http://duggmirror.com/apple/The_iPhone_is_a_piece_of_shit_and_so_is_your_face/?u=iphone

I have not stopped laughing at this. so fuckin' hilarious.

I might actually get that Nokia E-70.

Carnivore wrote: I'm not sure the intrnet infrastructure can handle the bandwidth required if a lot of people are constantly streaming their mp3s wherever they go. Picture any square block of Manhattan. How many iPods are in that block that would be trying to share that WiFi network to stream their songs. I don't think anyone would leave their network open if that were the case, because it would grind to a halt.

Crap, good point: bandwidth, the bottleneck.
I could see connectivity being a problem using the current systems we have. But perhaps the cell phone system could be used instead of wi-fi....I know there are logistic problems with this, but what is the current load capacity? I know the technology for cell service is different than that of the web but I'm just grasping here. It is ALL data, though. Or is this going in the wrong direction...?

Also, newer building owners are ditching cable lines all together and going with FIOS (fiber optic); The digital capacity is exponentially greater than cable lines used for internet. Now there is still a gap between the "receiver box" and the "wi-fi device", but could FIOS enter the equation in terms of data capacity/ bandwidth?

LTT: Good question, I think you probably would need to have a "data/ internet" plan because wi-fi is not always available. Or people would simply go to places where it is (cafes/ starbucks) and get it like they do with laptops now. But I would also want it on the MTA bus, Amtrack or while jogging in the park (BTW: does prospect park have Wi-fi?? I remember some chatter about that a while back).

This is all leading to some interesting points. Is our entire data infrastructure going to need to be rebuilt to handle the capacity of the near future?

A better question: Will compression technology of larger files get better? What if a movie was only 2MB or 900kB instead of 5GB, etc. to download- because of better compression technology...? Never say never. In 1995 who would have thoguth you could have your entire music collection in your pocket?

I'm such a geek, but I find this all very exciting.
Imagine having every song, movie, tv show ever made, GPS, satellite radio and the web available in the palm of your hand wherever you go. Isn't that really where we are trying to go with this technology, ultimately? We are not there yet and there are kinks abound, but this is such a great promising step.

10 years from now (or sooner) everyone will have one of these more dynamic devices (not necessarily by Apple) in their pocket - like cell phones. Isn't it also funny how "dated" the first and second gen ipods from 2001 look now?

This seems so...wrong.
And seems like a bad business decision on the part of Apple:

http://machinist.salon.com/blog/2007/09/28/unlock_iphone/

If you care about your rights, don't buy an iPhone

machinist

Late last fall, the Library of Congress issued six exemptions to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the far-ranging anti-piracy law that governs virtually all modern technologies. Among the exemptions was this: It is perfectly legal to unlock your mobile phone in order to move it to a cellular network of your choice. (See item No. 5 here.)

Consumer advocates hailed the decision. Not only is "cell phone portability" obviously fair, allowing customers to do what they choose with devices they have purchased legally, but it is also inarguably good for the wireless phone business, promoting competition in an industry that regularly scores in the pits for customer satisfaction.

It's not surprising that, a year after the Library of Congress's ruling, wireless companies have not appreciably changed their business models; they still frown on unlocking. But this week something dramatic occurred in the war for consumers' "freedom to tinker." Apple, a company highly regarded by its customers, staked out its position in the fight. The wrong position: Apple adopted a draconian policy against people who dared to do something perfectly legal with their iPhones, and thus came out in support of the wireless industry -- and against its own customers' rights.

On Monday Apple issued a press release warning people who had unlocked their iPhones from AT&T's network that they were in for big trouble. When Apple issued an update for the iPhone, all unlocked phones would become "permanently inoperable," the company said.

It wasn't lying; the update came out on Thursday, and reports from all over suggest that when people synced their unlocked phones to their computers and then installed the new software, their iPhones were rendered unusable.

It is unclear if this was meant to happen. It could be that Apple's unlock was buggy. (Some people who say they didn't hack their phone also report the update causing problems.) Some customers say they've found relief at Apple Stores, where Genius Bar personnel fixed their broken phones; others have had no such luck. Apple has yet to say what, if anything, it will do for people whose unlocked phones were broken by the update.

But it's clear that the company is playing hardball. Even if hackers manage to re-unlock phones now -- which they almost certainly will -- and even if Apple reauthorizes the broken phones, the firm has certainly made its position clear: Don't dare use your phone in a way we don't allow.

Apple is within its rights to do so. Though the Library of Congress made it legal for people to unlock their phones, it didn't prohibit companies from taking measures to prevent unlocking. So Apple's not doing anything illegal -- just profoundly unfair and unfriendly.

It's only in the cellphone business that anyone would tolerate such behavior. If a company tried this in any other industry, people would howl to the heavens. Imagine the outrage if Apple or Microsoft sold desktop PCs that allowed you to connect to the Internet only through Comcast -- and then, if you tried to use Earthlink instead, the company would shut down your machine. Or what if Ford allowed you to drive your new Explorer only to Wal-Mart to buy your groceries; if you went instead to Whole Foods, a company official would come by and slash your tires.

These scenarios sound bizarre. But how is Apple's iPhone policy any different? I understand that it has signed a deal with AT&T -- and, now, several carriers in Europe -- to deliver the iPhone exclusively. I understand it has obligations under those deals. What I'm disappointed by is how far Apple intends to take those contracts -- all the way to breaking people's phones is too, too far.

As I've written before, I consider the iPhone a revolutionary device. The hype was well-deserved; by delivering the Web on the go, the iPhone enhances nearly every aspect of a workaday life.

But Apple has now made it plain that anybody who buys the iPhone is not really buying it. What we're doing instead is more like renting it -- Apple remains your landlord, stern, controlling, and allowed to evict you at will. At whatever price -- $600, $400, $200 -- that's a very high cost to bear. If you care about your rights, don't buy an iPhone.

alafairnadia wrote: it's really obnoxious. the unlocking issue - fine. I can see how their position is necessary, not because they care but because of their contracts with at&t. but the 3rd party software? come on! if you don't provide a fuckin' ebook reader plug-in, and someone else does, why can't I use it? if you want me to buy it from you, fine, provide it. jesus christ. you can't offer a robust mini-computer/phone/internets device and then dictate that people can't customize it to optimal use for them! we're not all the same. steve jobs - wake up. you're acting like microsoft right now and it's not cute.

word.
Its seems so bizarrely vindictive...just mean. I know people accepted the "terms and conditions", but this type of play can backfire on Mr. Jobs. I am beginning to feel they are in over their heads (phone service) and are starting to realize the global implications (apparently phones that have NOT been "unlocked" are being "bricked" also...)

They are going to effectively create an underground apple hacking community - larger than what they are used to....

Apple's strength has always been that it designed the hardware AND software and it seemed to be a superior system over windows.

With the invention of their phone, they must now deal with third parties (phone companies) and their users, of course, and a host of other characters who might not typically tinker with an Apple device (hackers).

Apparently help is on the way from these guys...
http://www.tuaw.com/2007/09/25/iphone-dev-team-issues-statement/

But I heard Apple is trying to shut them down. This is going to get ugly.

Apple is just new to this particular game (PC-style hackers en masse). I have a Motorola that is "locked" as well, but there are a host of sites showing you how to unlock it and customize ring tones w/o being charged, etc.

Apple is going to have to open this thing up and let the iphone be what it really "wants" to be: an open device.

When will these companies learn?
Stop stifling and crippling technology.

God bless the Chinese:
http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/13/meizu-m8-minione-closer-to-production-litigation/