ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> zeez <UltimaUW@excite.com> wrote

>>>>> The iPhone looks like a nice peice of equipment, but the biggest
>>>>> beef I have with it is a lack of an SDK for 3rd party companies,
>>>>> freeware developers, etc. to write software on it that runs on
>>>>> the "bare metal" of the phone. This hardware has a hell of a lot
>>>>> of potential, but if Apple decides "no SDK", then it's little
>>>>> more than a pretty device, and at the price it's being sold at, I
>>>>> expect more than a souped up V-cast style "teenybopper" phone.
>>>>> Personaly, I wouldn't buy it until an SDK is released for it.

>>>> Me neither, but I realise I'm nothing like who its aimed at.

>>>> Bet it will do as well as the ipod did, just because
>>>> it integrates a decent phone with a media player.

>>>> Tho plenty will already have one of those, so it remains to
>>>> be seen how much effect being very late to market will have.

>>> I wouldn't consider Apple to be "very late" to this market.

>> More fool you. High end phones with all sorts of extra capability
>> have been around for a hell of a long time now, years, literally.

>>> True, some other devices that combine these capabilities
>>> have existed for some years. But the market for them has
>>> never really taken off and gone mainstream.

>> Yes, and it wont now, you watch.

>> Most want a much cheaper phone that combines phone,
>> media player, camera etc capability.

> It might take a couple of years and a couple of
> price cuts. It did for the iPod. But it will happen.

I doubt it with market penetration, essentially because a phone
is much more locked to the telco than a media player ever is
and most care about what their phone plan is costing them, it aint
just the sticker price on the hardware that matters with phones.

> The iPhone probably won't end up quite as dominant as the iPod,

Nothing like it in fact, if only because so many want a dirt cheap phone instead.

The phone market is VERY different to the media player market.

> because its attachment to a single network (at least
> in the US) will cause some people to look elsewhere,

And because even if the network is acceptible, the calls plan may not be.

> but it's going to be a major factor.

I doubt it, if only because its so late to market. Everyone who wants a high end
phone already has one and its unlikely to be their first high end phone either.

>> And those who want to be able to do email etc mostly
>> want a real keyboard, not a touchscreen one too.

> Doubt it.

Have a look at the high end phones.

> Remember, this is a smart phone primarily for the iPod demographic,

If thats so, they're fucked because so many already
have a phone and media player and camera combined.

Very late to market with theirs again.

> not for business types who mostly use the device for e-mail.

Sure, its not going to appeal to too many of those, just because it has no keyboard.

> And it's not clear to me that the on-screen keyboard doesn't work
> just as well as a physical keyboard. If you mash a couple of adjacent
> keys on a physical keyboard, it has no idea which one you were
> trying to hit. If you do the same on touch-screen keyboard, it can
> probably figure out where the center of your finger was and recover.

That doesnt really happen enough to matter much.

The problem is more that the screen is filled with the
touchscreen keyboard on those tiny screens and so you
cant read the email you are replying too at the same time.

Doesnt matter with a GPS where you are only entering a street
and town name and you get to select from a list once you have
typed a couple of letters, but email cant be done like that.

> Plus there's the auto correction feature.

Sure.

> Plus, with an on-screen input device, you can customize things
> for every app. For instance, the on-screen keyboard that comes
> up when you type in the URL field of Safari actually has a single
> key you get hit to insert ".com".

Sure, it would be fine for browsing, just not for emails.

And anyone with a clue uses favourites with browsing anyway and
a touchscreen does those even better than a physical keyboard.

>>> Apple introduced the iPod into a market that was in a similar state.

>> Nope, nothing like it. You dont need much controls wise for a media
>> player and the ipod design is rather elegant and well done in that regard.

> And the iPhone has just about the best designed UI I've ever
> seen on an actual product that's actually available to the public.

Sure, but it remains to be seen what they have done about back in the computer.
If its anything like the iPod there, its pretty primitive back in the computer.

> Even most unlikely concept product UI demos one sees don't look as good.

My main reservation is with the the two finger approach,
cant see that being too viable in a phone where you mostly
hold it in one hand and use the other on the screen.

Maybe you wont do the two finger stuff enough to matter tho.

>> And virtually everyone didnt already have a media player at
>> the time that the ipod showed up. Virtually everyone already
>> has a cellphone now and most of those already have a media
>> player now too if they use one much. Hordes of them have a
>> media player/phone/camera combined already.

> However, most of those people don't use the media player
> functions of their phones, because they use iPods instead.

That is just plain wrong when their phone has a media player.

> The market has shown that it greatly values iPods over other media players.

Yes, but its different when the phone is also a media player as most are now.

> I would expect it would greatly value an iPod phone over
> other media player phones, for all the same reasons.

Maybe, but the problem Apple has is that they already have those media player
phones because Apple is so late to market with theirs and its locked to AT&T too.

> Plus, people replace their phone and media player every couple of years anyway.

Sure, thats certainly one thing in Apple's favour, but you dont see
too many change platform completely. Thats what fucked the Mac.

> And the iPhone isn't all that expensive compared
> with the cost of an iPod + a phone.

Thats not a valid comparison, you should be comparing it with other media player phones.

> (If you restrict your choice of phone to one of the
> few others with a decent web browser, anyway.)

There's plenty with that capability now, with media player and camera and often GPS as well.