On Thu, 22 Nov 2007, Mitch wrote:
> it isn't very big, and it certainly isn't big compared to anything that
> has close to that screen res.

iPhone is huge compared to devices which have twice or four times the
screen resolution. Apple must have gotten a cheap deal on some old
technology LCDs

> it isn't particularly slow processing
> locked isn't horrible, and it isn't any problem for almost everyone

Being locked is most certainly a problem when it is locked to the worst
major carrier in the US.

> Just what are you calling proprietary?

As a phone, it isn't particularly proprietary, but as an Internet access
device it is. The Internet access device market is one in which the
entire firmware (not just selected pieces) is open source, and in which
people can, and do, produce and distribute their own modified firmware.

> Yes, if you are satisfied with a phone that has a 160x160 screen, then
> iPhone isn't for you -- because nearly everything iPhone is made to be
> good at is nearly impossible on that cheap phone.

I am not satisfied with an Internet access device that has a cheap, tiny,
320x480 screen. Access to "the real Internet" requires at least 800
pixels of width (preferably 1024 or more) and at least 480 pixels of
height (preferably 600, 768, or more). It is not "the real Internet" if
you have to zoom out to an unreadable level to see page layout, then zoom
in to read the text. It is not "the real Internet" if web designers have
to create special CSS to "optimize" for your device.

LCD screens are on the market that are not substantially larger than
iPhone, but have 800x600 and 1024x600 resolutions. The 800x600 screen is
on a device that sells for slightly more than 1/2 the price of iPhone.

I can't get over how HUGE the pixels are in iPhone. Maybe you think that
that is decent image resolution, but to me it is like looking at a
newspaper.

> (I need not even explain why that major primary factor makes the phone
> more expensive, nor why the people who need that feature aren't being
> ripped off, right?)

That argument doesn't wash. Three year old screen technology (and yes,
320x480 screens were on phones in Japan in 2004) isn't that expensive.

> It doesn't mean iPhone is bad, or a bad choice, it means it isn't the
> phone for that customer.
> It doesn't mean Apple made a bad phone for that customer -- it means
> they didn't make anything for that customer at all!

These arguments may be correct. The problem is that certain cretins (most
notably Oxford) claim that iPhone is the be-all and end-all for everybody.

iPhone's legitimate market is that of a way-cool iPod that is also a phone
and an Internet access device; and its legitimate customers are those who
want a way-cool iPod that is also a phone and an Internet access device.

iPhone is not "the best phone". As a phone, it is mediocre. It is large,
it is expensive, it is locked, it is 2G-only, and its voice performance is
merely adequate. Other products do better in all of these categories.
Remember, we are talking about "as a phone" -- the screen resolution is
irrelevant here.

iPhone is not "the best Internet access device." As an Internet access
device, it is slightly better than most consumer phones; but quite
inadequate compared to other mobile devices on the market. The Nokia 800
kicks iPhone butt in this regard.

Case in point. iPod Touch, which started out as iPhone minus the phone,
is failing badly in the market. The question is not "if" Apple will
cancel it, but "when". It is overpriced, both as an iPod and as an
Internet access device. It deletes more than just the phone part of
iPhone, making it much less attractive. Clearly, Apple was worried that
iPod Touch would compete with iPhone, but in the process of making it
non-competitive with iPhone they made it non-competitive with the Nokia
N800.

iPhone is not a business tool at all. It lacks the business tools found
in smart phones. The few executives who tried iPhone as a substitute for
Blackberry quickly went back to their Blackberry.

Nobody, nobody!!, is disputing that iPhone is king of the "way-cool iPod
that is also a phone and an Internet access device" market. For people
who want that sort of thing, iPhone is perfect.

Nonetheless, iPhone is not a serious player in the phone market, nor the
Internet access device market, nor the business tool market. Nor is
iPhone a serious player in the teenager market (way too geeky for the
girls, way too nerdish for most of the boys). iPhone is a toy for adult,
primarily male, nerds who play with technological toys but don't really
*need* it.

iPhone will have at least one follow-on product. But it has pretty much
gotten as much market share as it is going to get; and the successor
iPhone will cannibalize previous sales more than gain new market.

As noted above, iPod Touch is toast, barring a major price drop (e.g.,
$175 for the 8GB version and $250 for the 16GB version). Expect to see
that kind of pricing at firesale if Apple does not buy them back.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.