Very bad news for AT&T--Verizon to get Palm Pre in Six Months, andAndroid Smart Phones

Just when AT&T was fretting about declining iPhone sales, Verizon
dropped a bomb today with its announcement that they'll have the Palm
Pre after Sprint's six month exclusivity arrangement expires, as well as
an Android O/S smart phone.

All the experts agree that the Palm Pre and G1 far outperform the
current iPhone 3G, what isn't known yet is how well the upcoming iPhone
refresh will address the issues with the iPhone.

At 28 May 2009 18:47:47 -0700 SMS wrote:
> Just when AT&T was fretting about declining iPhone sales, Verizon
> dropped a bomb today with its announcement that they'll have the Palm
> Pre after Sprint's six month exclusivity arrangement expires, as well
> as an Android O/S smart phone.
>
> All the experts agree that the Palm Pre and G1 far outperform the
> current iPhone 3G, what isn't known yet is how well the upcoming iPhone
> refresh will address the issues with the iPhone.


"All the experts" probably also agree that regardless of how much more
functionality the Pre or Android phone(s) have, the phone with the half-
eaten fruit silkscreened on the back will outsell them. Look at the iPod-
despite more featured media players on the market, the iPod outsells
them all.

Todd Allcock wrote:

>At 28 May 2009 18:47:47 -0700 SMS wrote:
>> Just when AT&T was fretting about declining iPhone sales, Verizon
>> dropped a bomb today with its announcement that they'll have the
>>Palm Pre after Sprint's six month exclusivity arrangement expires,
>>as well as an Android O/S smart phone.
>>
>> All the experts agree that the Palm Pre and G1 far outperform the
>> current iPhone 3G, what isn't known yet is how well the upcoming
>>iPhone refresh will address the issues with the iPhone.
>
>
>"All the experts" probably also agree that regardless of how much more
>functionality the Pre or Android phone(s) have, the phone with the
>half- eaten fruit silkscreened on the back will outsell them. Look
>at the iPod- despite more featured media players on the market, the
>iPod outsells them all.

You're probably right. It's more a case of pop culture than technology.

SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> Just when AT&T was fretting about declining iPhone sales, Verizon
> dropped a bomb today with its announcement that they'll have the Palm
> Pre after Sprint's six month exclusivity arrangement expires, as well as
> an Android O/S smart phone.
>
> All the experts agree that the Palm Pre and G1 far outperform the
> current iPhone 3G, what isn't known yet is how well the upcoming iPhone
> refresh will address the issues with the iPhone.

what? no experts agree the Pre or G1 outperforms the 3G iPhone, it's
actually quite the opposite. We all know iPhone 3.0 is going to bury the
Pre, especially if a $99 price point for the 8GB model materializes.

Todd Allcock <elecconnec@aNOoSPAMl.com> wrote:

> Look at the iPod-
> despite more featured media players on the market, the iPod outsells
> them all.

just curious... what MP3 player has more features than an iPod? that
doesn't seem correct.

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:

> >"All the experts" probably also agree that regardless of how much more
> >functionality the Pre or Android phone(s) have, the phone with the
> >half- eaten fruit silkscreened on the back will outsell them. Look
> >at the iPod- despite more featured media players on the market, the
> >iPod outsells them all.
>
> You're probably right. It's more a case of pop culture than technology.

nah, it has to do with apple's superior products, not pop culture. they
have have a firm lock on the best designs with the best tech. the only
people that disagree simply don't own one of them.

At 29 May 2009 07:01:06 -0600 David Moyer wrote:
> Todd Allcock <elecconnec@aNOoSPAMl.com> wrote:
>
> > Look at the iPod-
> > despite more featured media players on the market, the iPod outsells
> > them all.
>
> just curious... what MP3 player has more features than an iPod? that
> doesn't seem correct.

Well, the oft-mailigned Zune offers Wifi (only found on the iPod
Touch/iPhone), FM radio and rudimentary song sharing, many players offer
playback of more file formats, some models offer FM transmitters to
connect to car radios, etc.

On Fri, 29 May 2009 07:01:06 -0600, David Moyer wrote:

> Todd Allcock <elecconnec@aNOoSPAMl.com> wrote:
>
>> Look at the iPod-
>> despite more featured media players on the market, the iPod outsells
>> them all.
>
> just curious... what MP3 player has more features than an iPod? that
> doesn't seem correct.

I have a Creative Zen Vision M that cost me less than an iPod, and is more
versatile:

2-1/2" color screen
Music: MP3, WMA, WAV and Audible
Images: JPEG (GIF, TIFF, PNG and BMP)
Video: MPEG1/2/4-SP, WMV9, Motion-JPEG, compatible DivX® 4 and 5,
XviD and AVI
Organizer: Syncs with and views Microsoft Outlook Contacts, Calendar
& Tasks
FM Radio
Voice Recorder
Sleep and wake timers
8 EQ settings: acoustic, classical, disco, jazz, new age, pop, rock and
vocal
Functions as an external hard drive

Granted, it has a 60GB hard drive compared to the iPod's 120GB, but
it still holds more than enough songs/videos for most people.

Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
"David Moyer" <davmoy@world.com> wrote in message
news:4a1fd003$0$1338$815e3792@news.qwest.net...
> SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Just when AT&T was fretting about declining iPhone sales, Verizon
>> dropped a bomb today with its announcement that they'll have the Palm
>> Pre after Sprint's six month exclusivity arrangement expires, as well
>> as
>> an Android O/S smart phone.
>>
>> All the experts agree that the Palm Pre and G1 far outperform the
>> current iPhone 3G, what isn't known yet is how well the upcoming
>> iPhone
>> refresh will address the issues with the iPhone.
>
> what? no experts agree the Pre or G1 outperforms the 3G iPhone, it's
> actually quite the opposite. We all know iPhone 3.0 is going to bury
> the
> Pre, especially if a $99 price point for the 8GB model materializes.

Whether the phone costs $99, $199 or $299 isn't nearly as relevant as
$10-$20/month changes in the cost of the data plan. My family has four
iPhones. Trust me, I feel know where the real costs are. And I'm also
rather annoyed that one is rarely used as anything other than a phone.
An iPhone makes a very, very expensive phone. For me, it's a great tool,
used in many ways around the business and elsewhere. I get my $$$ worth
out of it. But it's not the right choice for everyone.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

In message <4a1fd1bd$0$1338$815e3792@news.qwest.net> David Moyer
<davmoy@world.com> was claimed to have wrote:

>Todd Allcock <elecconnec@aNOoSPAMl.com> wrote:
>
>> Look at the iPod-
>> despite more featured media players on the market, the iPod outsells
>> them all.
>
>just curious... what MP3 player has more features than an iPod? that
>doesn't seem correct.

Well, creative's MP3 players handle a heck of a lot more media formats
then comparable iPods, that's a good place to start.

Being able to manage all of the various media formats from any PC is
another handy feature.

The Zune has a FM receiver.

Others have FM transmitters.

DevilsPGD, 5/30/2009,12:09:48 AM, wrote:

> Others have FM transmitters.

Don't you need a FCC license for that?

On Sat, 30 May 2009 12:46:10 +0000 (UTC), "badgolferman"
<REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:

>DevilsPGD, 5/30/2009,12:09:48 AM, wrote:
>
>> Others have FM transmitters.
>
>Don't you need a FCC license for that?
>

No. They are extremely low power transmitters that allow you to play
your device through an unused FM frequency on your car radio. Most
only have a range of 20 feet or so.

In message <xn0garpvh9vpfo6000@news.albasani.net> "badgolferman"
<REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> was claimed to have wrote:

>DevilsPGD, 5/30/2009,12:09:48 AM, wrote:
>
>> Others have FM transmitters.
>
>Don't you need a FCC license for that?

No.

http://www.gate.net/~advradio/fcc.html

On May 28, 10:19*pm, Todd Allcock <eleccon...@aNOoSPAMl.com> wrote:

> "All the experts" probably also agree that regardless of how much more
> functionality the Pre or Android phone(s) have, the phone with the half-
> eaten fruit silkscreened on the back will outsell them. *Look at the iPod-
> *despite more featured media players on the market, the iPod outsells
> them all.

The iPhone is a very different animal than the iPod. The features that
the iPod lacks are not that difficult to get around with after-market
accessories and software applications except perhaps the lack of an
expansion memory slot (as exists on players like the ones from
Sandisk). And I have to say that my daughter's iPod has a much nicer
user interface than my own Sandisk Sansa (though the Sansa has been
far more reliable, and has better battery life).

The features that the iPhone lacks are integral to the design, and are
not as easy to work around. Despite the success of the iPhone
applications store, there are still far fewer applications for the
iPhone than for competing platforms, plus most of the applications on
the iPhone apps store are fun, but essentially useless. I.e., my
nephew was showing me an app he had for use at concerts--an image of a
cigarette lighter with flickering flame.

Of course Apple is perfectly free to change the iPhone design so that
it isn't intentionally limited in the ways that all the experts are
talking about.

On May 29, 7:40*pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
wrote:
> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA"David Moyer" <dav...@world.com> wrote inmessage
>
> news:4a1fd003$0$1338$815e3792@news.qwest.net...
>
>
>
> > SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Just when AT&T was fretting about declining iPhone sales, Verizon
> >> dropped a bomb today with its announcement that they'll have the Palm
> >> Pre after Sprint's six month exclusivity arrangement expires, as well
> >> as
> >> an Android O/S smart phone.
>
> >> All the experts agree that the Palm Pre and G1 far outperform the
> >> current iPhone 3G, what isn't known yet is how well the upcoming
> >> iPhone
> >> refresh will address the issues with the iPhone.
>
> > what? no experts agree the Pre or G1 outperforms the 3G iPhone, it's
> > actually quite the opposite. We all know iPhone 3.0 is going to bury
> > the
> > Pre, especially if a $99 price point for the 8GB model materializes.
>
> Whether the phone costs $99, $199 or $299 isn't nearly as relevant as
> $10-$20/month changes in the cost of the data plan. My family has four
> iPhones. Trust me, I feel know where the real costs are. And I'm also
> rather annoyed that one is rarely used as anything other than a phone.
> An iPhone makes a very, very expensive phone. For me, it's a great tool,
> used in many ways around the business and elsewhere. I get my $$$ worth
> out of it. But it's not the right choice for everyone.

I doubt if the Pre or the Verizon Android model will have
substantially lower data charges.

Personally, there are so few times that I'm not either on a home or
work computer, or that there's not free Wi-Fi available, that using
pay-as-you-go 3G data is far less expensive than paying $30/month. I
doubt if I've ever spent more than $5/month on data, but then I'm not
sending photos or updating web sites over the phone.

In article
<e217b4cf-c112-4838-8b21-f674a0c4b454@o20g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>,
Steve <scharf.steven@gmail.com> wrote:

> > "All the experts" probably also agree that regardless of how much more
> > functionality the Pre or Android phone(s) have, the phone with the half-
> > eaten fruit silkscreened on the back will outsell them. *Look at the iPod-
> > *despite more featured media players on the market, the iPod outsells
> > them all.
>
> The iPhone is a very different animal than the iPod. The features that
> the iPod lacks are not that difficult to get around with after-market
> accessories and software applications except perhaps the lack of an
> expansion memory slot (as exists on players like the ones from
> Sandisk).

and not very many people bother getting those accessories, so maybe
there's a good reason for why those features aren't in there.

> And I have to say that my daughter's iPod has a much nicer
> user interface than my own Sandisk Sansa (though the Sansa has been
> far more reliable, and has better battery life).
>
> The features that the iPhone lacks are integral to the design, and are
> not as easy to work around.

such as?

> Despite the success of the iPhone
> applications store, there are still far fewer applications for the
> iPhone than for competing platforms,

got some numbers?

> plus most of the applications on
> the iPhone apps store are fun, but essentially useless. I.e., my
> nephew was showing me an app he had for use at concerts--an image of a
> cigarette lighter with flickering flame.

if he enjoys it, it's not useless. there are a lot of very useful apps
and a lot of stupid ones, much like any platform. i doubt all of the
apps for other platforms are useful.

> Of course Apple is perfectly free to change the iPhone design so that
> it isn't intentionally limited in the ways that all the experts are
> talking about.

intentionally limited? if it's so limited, why is it selling so well?
aren't people finding it to be limiting?

"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:010620091231406167%nospam@nospam.invalid...
> In article
> <e217b4cf-c112-4838-8b21-f674a0c4b454@o20g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>,
> Steve <scharf.steven@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > "All the experts" probably also agree that regardless of how much more
>> > functionality the Pre or Android phone(s) have, the phone with the
>> > half-
>> > eaten fruit silkscreened on the back will outsell them. Look at the
>> > iPod-
>> > despite more featured media players on the market, the iPod outsells
>> > them all.
>>
>> The iPhone is a very different animal than the iPod. The features that
>> the iPod lacks are not that difficult to get around with after-market
>> accessories and software applications except perhaps the lack of an
>> expansion memory slot (as exists on players like the ones from
>> Sandisk).
>
> and not very many people bother getting those accessories, so maybe
> there's a good reason for why those features aren't in there.

If "not many people bother getting those accessories" why do so many
manufactures make them, and retail stores devote so much shelf space to
them?

A better explanation, IMO, is the "totality" issue- many put up with
limitations because they prefer the "whole enchilada"- my wife and her
iPhone is an excellent example- even after a half a year with it, she still
hates the on-screen keyboard compared to her Blackberry and old QWERTY WinMo
phone. But as a whole, she prefers the iPhone. Similarly, lovers of the
iPod UI, or its integration with iTunes might make others overlook the lack
of other features, like drag/drop, FM radio, etc., that are less important
to them. The fact that 3rd-party hardware can replace the "missing"
features makes the decision to choose an iPod even easier- if I really want
a device with an iPod UI and an FM radio, I can buy an iPod and an
aftermarket FM radio dongle instead of a Zune.


>> And I have to say that my daughter's iPod has a much nicer
>> user interface than my own Sandisk Sansa (though the Sansa has been
>> far more reliable, and has better battery life).
>>
>> The features that the iPhone lacks are integral to the design, and are
>> not as easy to work around.
>
> such as?

Lack of storage card expansion, non-swappable battery, etc. would be
features not easy to work around, as opposed to, say, support of more file
formats, that could theoretically be compensated for by additional software
(either on the device, or on a computer for format conversion prior to
transferring.)


>> Of course Apple is perfectly free to change the iPhone design so that
>> it isn't intentionally limited in the ways that all the experts are
>> talking about.
>
> intentionally limited? if it's so limited, why is it selling so well?
> aren't people finding it to be limiting?

Sure they are- but again, it's the totality issue. My wife is frustrated
with the on-screen keyboard, the inability to download a large app over
cellular data, and that she can't use Pandora while checking email.
However, with the Blackberry she hates the barebones WAP browser, with her
WinMo T-Mobile Dash, she hated the need for an audio adapter to use standard
headphones. (She lost 3 or 4 of them before giving up on using it as a
media player- it became essentially an "email machine" for her.) As a
"total package" she much prefers the iPhone, but that doesn't mean it isn't
limited- just that users, like her, will put up with the bad to get the
good, just like the user of any piece of equipment. Despite loving the
iPhone, I notice she often waits until she gets to a real computer before
replying to email. She thinks nothing of knocking out a three or four
paragraph email reply on the Blackberry or on her old WinMo phone- now with
the iPhone, she primarily just reads email, and waits until she gets to a
computer to reply rather than struggle with the on-screen keyboard, unless
the reply is a one or two-liner.

For me, the iPhone's bad outweighs the good- I put up with the bad (like the
lesser browsing experience and awkward UI) on Windows Mobile, to get the
good, like more functionality as a laptop replacement, the abilty to use
just about any media format, to simulataneously navigate and stream audio on
a long car trip, etc. With the right mix of third-party apps, most of
WinMo's defects (at least for me) are mitigated- between Opera Mini and
Skyfire, I have 90% of the iPhone browsing experience (and in some ways
better, given Skyfire's full Flash support.) With Coreplayer, I have a
better "iPod" than an iPod, in many ways. As to the UI, I've put up with it
for so long, (nearly ten years) that it's second nature to me now, but I
realize how off-putting it can be to new users.

In article <9gVUl.73450$Rf7.72259@newsfe21.iad>, Todd Allcock
<elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote:

> >> The iPhone is a very different animal than the iPod. The features that
> >> the iPod lacks are not that difficult to get around with after-market
> >> accessories and software applications except perhaps the lack of an
> >> expansion memory slot (as exists on players like the ones from
> >> Sandisk).
> >
> > and not very many people bother getting those accessories, so maybe
> > there's a good reason for why those features aren't in there.
>
> If "not many people bother getting those accessories" why do so many
> manufactures make them, and retail stores devote so much shelf space to
> them?

that doesn't mean they sell zillions. after all, there is a lot of
shelf space for zune accessories too.

i base my observation on that i see people with ipods every day walking
around town, in grocery stores, subway trains, airplanes, etc. and i've
yet to see anyone with anything more than headphones plugged in. i
don't see ipods with fm tuners, battery packs, remotes or anything
else. i do see the occasional cd player though. it's not really a
valid sample of course, but i would think i'd see at least a couple if
the features are highly desired.

> A better explanation, IMO, is the "totality" issue- many put up with
> limitations because they prefer the "whole enchilada"- my wife and her
> iPhone is an excellent example- even after a half a year with it, she still
> hates the on-screen keyboard compared to her Blackberry and old QWERTY WinMo
> phone. But as a whole, she prefers the iPhone. Similarly, lovers of the
> iPod UI, or its integration with iTunes might make others overlook the lack
> of other features, like drag/drop, FM radio, etc., that are less important
> to them. The fact that 3rd-party hardware can replace the "missing"
> features makes the decision to choose an iPod even easier- if I really want
> a device with an iPod UI and an FM radio, I can buy an iPod and an
> aftermarket FM radio dongle instead of a Zune.

having every possible feature is not feasible. apple picked a mix they
thought would be best and other companies picked a different mix.
based on sales, apple got more right than they got wrong. nothing is
perfect, and it's good to have choices.

and i never really did understand why people want an fm radio on a
device that has all of their favourite music. a radio would play some
songs they like, some songs they don't like, and a crapload of annoying
commercials. plus, with the iphone/ipod touch, there are streaming
radio apps so one can get not just local radio stations, but radio
stations from anywhere in the world.

personally, i'd want an *am* radio rather than fm so i could get news,
sports, traffic, etc. but i can do that with an app so it's not really
a big deal.

> >> The features that the iPhone lacks are integral to the design, and are
> >> not as easy to work around.
> >
> > such as?
>
> Lack of storage card expansion, non-swappable battery, etc. would be
> features not easy to work around, as opposed to, say, support of more file
> formats, that could theoretically be compensated for by additional software
> (either on the device, or on a computer for format conversion prior to
> transferring.)

true, but that goes back to how many people want those features. you
said yourself that your wife gets more than a day of battery use and
wouldn't carry another battery anyway, so the lack of a swappable
battery is moot. why include it if few people are going to use it?

as for storage, most people don't have more than 4 gig or so of music
based on apple's research, so 8-16 gig (and likely to be twice that in
the next model) is more than enough. sure, some people will want more
but where do you draw the line? i know someone for whom a 160 gig ipod
is not enough for his music.

more file formats is valid though, but that is a software issue and is
easily solved.

> >> Of course Apple is perfectly free to change the iPhone design so that
> >> it isn't intentionally limited in the ways that all the experts are
> >> talking about.
> >
> > intentionally limited? if it's so limited, why is it selling so well?
> > aren't people finding it to be limiting?
>
> Sure they are- but again, it's the totality issue. My wife is frustrated
> with the on-screen keyboard, the inability to download a large app over
> cellular data, and that she can't use Pandora while checking email.

the app limit over cell is an arbitrary limit, but there aren't really
that many apps that are larger than 10 meg so it doesn't affect that
many people. how often does she buy a large app?

> However, with the Blackberry she hates the barebones WAP browser, with her
> WinMo T-Mobile Dash, she hated the need for an audio adapter to use standard
> headphones. (She lost 3 or 4 of them before giving up on using it as a
> media player- it became essentially an "email machine" for her.)

the proprietary headphone jack is bizarre. what *were* they thinking?

"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:010620091706506742%nospam@nospam.invalid...

>> > and not very many people bother getting those accessories, so maybe
>> > there's a good reason for why those features aren't in there.
>>
>> If "not many people bother getting those accessories" why do so many
>> manufactures make them, and retail stores devote so much shelf space to
>> them?
>
> that doesn't mean they sell zillions. after all, there is a lot of
> shelf space for zune accessories too.


True. Again, I'm agreeing with your basic premise- the iPod outsells other
players _despite_ not having the most features. It has a basic set of
desired features coupled with a nice user experience. I'm just saying there
is a market, albeit a smaller one, desiring more features.


> i base my observation on that i see people with ipods every day walking
> around town, in grocery stores, subway trains, airplanes, etc. and i've
> yet to see anyone with anything more than headphones plugged in. i
> don't see ipods with fm tuners, battery packs, remotes or anything
> else. i do see the occasional cd player though. it's not really a
> valid sample of course, but i would think i'd see at least a couple if
> the features are highly desired.


Perhaps those features are being used by the people you see without iPods-
the Zune and Sansa owners, for example. (Besides, other than maybe a
plug-in FM radio, the other accessories, like remote controls, aren't likely
to be used regularly by joggers and commuters.)


>> A better explanation, IMO, is the "totality" issue- many put up with
>> limitations because they prefer the "whole enchilada"- my wife and her
>> iPhone is an excellent example- even after a half a year with it, she
>> still
>> hates the on-screen keyboard compared to her Blackberry and old QWERTY
>> WinMo
>> phone. But as a whole, she prefers the iPhone. Similarly, lovers of the
>> iPod UI, or its integration with iTunes might make others overlook the
>> lack
>> of other features, like drag/drop, FM radio, etc., that are less
>> important
>> to them. The fact that 3rd-party hardware can replace the "missing"
>> features makes the decision to choose an iPod even easier- if I really
>> want
>> a device with an iPod UI and an FM radio, I can buy an iPod and an
>> aftermarket FM radio dongle instead of a Zune.
>
> having every possible feature is not feasible. apple picked a mix they
> thought would be best and other companies picked a different mix.
> based on sales, apple got more right than they got wrong. nothing is
> perfect, and it's good to have choices.


Agreed. The folly, IMO, is the assumption that missing features are
unimportant/unwanted, just because the best selling device doesn't have
them. I still think there's a large pentup demand for an iPhone with an
HTC-style sliding keyboard, for example. Not as big a demand as the current
form factor, and perhaps not enough of a demand for Apple to bother
fragmenting their manufacturing to offer one (offering a limited number of
device variants has significant cost benefits) but a significant demand
nonetheless. If the 3.0 software allows for it, I suspect we'll see a
small, thin, keyboard as one of the early hot-selling dock-connector
accessories, if someone builds one that somehow connects _attractively_ to
the iPhone in landscape mode. (If not, you're fully authorized to say "I
told you so!") ;-)


> and i never really did understand why people want an fm radio on a
> device that has all of their favourite music. a radio would play some
> songs they like, some songs they don't like, and a crapload of annoying
> commercials.


There are times when people want to hear music not on their device.
Particularly with the more popular flash-based media players, it's difficult
to have "all of your favorite music" with you when you're limited to 4 or
8GB instead of 120, and, frankly, FM radios add virtually nothing to the
size or cost of a device these days. Many low-end cellphones even include
FM radios.


> plus, with the iphone/ipod touch, there are streaming
> radio apps so one can get not just local radio stations, but radio
> stations from anywhere in the world.


Just not one that'll let you read your email at the same time! ;-) Sure,
streaming is an effective substitute for a radio, but most iPods don't offer
ubiquitous connectivity.


> personally, i'd want an *am* radio rather than fm so i could get news,
> sports, traffic, etc. but i can do that with an app so it's not really
> a big deal.


Unfortunately, AM doesn't play well with ultra-portable devices, due to
interference issues and antenna size. (AM tuners can't get away with using
the headphone cord as an antenna!)


>> >> The features that the iPhone lacks are integral to the design, and are
>> >> not as easy to work around.
>> >
>> > such as?
>>
>> Lack of storage card expansion, non-swappable battery, etc. would be
>> features not easy to work around, as opposed to, say, support of more
>> file
>> formats, that could theoretically be compensated for by additional
>> software
>> (either on the device, or on a computer for format conversion prior to
>> transferring.)
>
> true, but that goes back to how many people want those features. you
> said yourself that your wife gets more than a day of battery use and
> wouldn't carry another battery anyway, so the lack of a swappable
> battery is moot. why include it if few people are going to use it?

Well, we could always rehash the eventual
replacement-without-sending-it-to-Apple debate, but most people do change
devices often enough to mitigate that. But it might make, say, handing down
my wife's iPhone to my son or daughter harder when she upgrades to a newer
model someday. There will be a day when an iPhone 2G isn't worth the $70 it
costs to factory-replace the battery. But even the oldest Palm Treo is
still worth more than the $5-10 an aftermarket battery costs.

Plus, while my wife wouldn't ordinarily swap batteries, she would in
extraordinary circumstances. She took a four hour flight this morning, and
presumably used her iPhone for entertainment. After four hours of movie
playback, she'd wouldn't be able to make it the rest of the day if she
didn't carry an auxillary battery-powered charger with her when traveling:
http://www.amazon.com/MusicPower-090.../dp/B000QFNK6K.

(A neat unit, though- we use them for a variety of USB-powered devices
including our phones and Zunes- this way we only need to pack one charger
when traveling, and just bring our various sync/charge cables with us to
charge our devices two at a time.)


> as for storage, most people don't have more than 4 gig or so of music
> based on apple's research, so 8-16 gig (and likely to be twice that in
> the next model) is more than enough. sure, some people will want more
> but where do you draw the line? i know someone for whom a 160 gig ipod
> is not enough for his music.

You could draw the line as "FM Radio..." ;-) Kidding aside, though, yes,
flash capabilities will make hard-disc-based devices obsolete eventually,
but don't forget video messes up your statistics. My 30GB Zunes only have a
couple of GB of music, but they're also carrying 20+ GB of videos. Hi-def
capable units will only make it worse.


> more file formats is valid though, but that is a software issue and is
> easily solved.


Yeah, but it's just an additional hassle. Because of the iPhone I now do
the kids' stuff in WMV for their Zunes and cheapo Plays-for-Sure media
players, and the "grownup" stuff in .mp4 for the iPhone, (which I can also
play on my WinMo devices with Coreplayer.) Previously, everything we owned
could handle WMV, so it was easier for me. I had to reencode a bunch of her
favorite movies to .mp4 after buying the iPhone.

>> >> Of course Apple is perfectly free to change the iPhone design so that
>> >> it isn't intentionally limited in the ways that all the experts are
>> >> talking about.
>> >
>> > intentionally limited? if it's so limited, why is it selling so well?
>> > aren't people finding it to be limiting?
>>
>> Sure they are- but again, it's the totality issue. My wife is frustrated
>> with the on-screen keyboard, the inability to download a large app over
>> cellular data, and that she can't use Pandora while checking email.
>
> the app limit over cell is an arbitrary limit,

Exactly. Completely arbitrary. which makes it that much more annoying! The
ability to do large data downloads should be between me and my cell carrier,
not me and my phone manufacturer! T-Mobile controlled that at the network
level- the lower-end data plans had a 1MB download limit as a function of
the data plan. My phone manufacture should butt out if my carrier doesn't
have a problem with it. This is why I often joke that the iPhone "forgets"
who owns it.

> but there aren't really
> that many apps that are larger than 10 meg so it doesn't affect that
> many people. how often does she buy a large app?

Faulty logic- if so few apps are larger than 10MB, than the limit is
theoretically unneccessary!

However, you'd be surprised at the number of games (and, therefore, updates
for previously downloaded games!) that exceed 10MB. I know I was. Of the
forty or so apps on her phone, I think 4 or 5 are over 10MB. 10% isn't a
huge number, but it's hardly insignificant, either.

>> However, with the Blackberry she hates the barebones WAP browser, with
>> her
>> WinMo T-Mobile Dash, she hated the need for an audio adapter to use
>> standard
>> headphones. (She lost 3 or 4 of them before giving up on using it as a
>> media player- it became essentially an "email machine" for her.)
>
> the proprietary headphone jack is bizarre. what *were* they thinking?

They use the same excuse iPhone fans do about the non-removeable battery and
lack of flash-card slot: "space considerations." The iPhone 2G is only
slightly better in that regard- my wife forgot her Sony ("works with the
iPhone") noise-cancelling headphones on the trip we took last weekend. Of
the five pairs of headphones I found packed in my travel bag and/or laying
around the car, NONE fit the recessed jack on the 2G. We took my car
instead of hers, so we didn't have the adapter she leaves plugged into her
car radio's auxillarly input cord, so she went a three-day weekend (in a
cabin without TV!) unable to use the iPhone as an iPod.

[Oh, the irony of having to borrow one of the kids' lowly Zunes when the
"best iPod ever" sat on the nightstand! My wife has difficulty falling
asleep without TV, and fortunately, there were still a few of her favorite
movies and few episodes of Seinfeld on the Zune back from her pre-iPhone
days when she used a Zune when traveling.]

Thankfully Apple fixed that annoyance on the 3G, but just like with HTC,
it's just criminal to sell ANY purported "multimedia" device without a
standard (and non-recessed!) 3.5mm jack. The only real difference, as far
as the end user is concerned, is the iPhone 2G sold enough units to convince
most headphone manufacturers to support the stupid recessed jack without an
adapter. Unfortunately for my wife, all of the headphones we had with us
were older than the iPhone. I'll have to grab an extra adapter or a cheap
pair of Sonys next time I'm at Target or Walmart to stow in my travel bag
"just in case." (Ironically, I did have an iPhone 2G-compatible auxillary
audio cable in my car that was part of a "bonus iPod/Zune travel kit" that
came included with a clearance Griffin FM modulator I bought recently, so if
the trip was longer I probably would've MacGuyvered her an iPhone 2G
headphone by cutting both the cable and an old pair of headphones and
splicing them together. I guess I could just trade aux cables with her and
slip the adapter currently on hers in my travel kit, but her cable is longer
and much better constructed than my flimsy "freebie"...)

"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:010620091706506742%nospam@nospam.invalid...
> In article <9gVUl.73450$Rf7.72259@newsfe21.iad>, Todd Allcock
> <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote:
>
>> >> The iPhone is a very different animal than the iPod. The features that
>> >> the iPod lacks are not that difficult to get around with after-market
>> >> accessories and software applications except perhaps the lack of an
>> >> expansion memory slot (as exists on players like the ones from
>> >> Sandisk).
>> >
>> > and not very many people bother getting those accessories, so maybe
>> > there's a good reason for why those features aren't in there.
>>
>> If "not many people bother getting those accessories" why do so many
>> manufactures make them, and retail stores devote so much shelf space to
>> them?
>
> that doesn't mean they sell zillions. after all, there is a lot of
> shelf space for zune accessories too.
>
> i base my observation on that i see people with ipods every day walking
> around town, in grocery stores, subway trains, airplanes, etc. and i've
> yet to see anyone with anything more than headphones plugged in. i
> don't see ipods with fm tuners, battery packs, remotes or anything
> else. i do see the occasional cd player though. it's not really a
> valid sample of course, but i would think i'd see at least a couple if
> the features are highly desired.
>
>> A better explanation, IMO, is the "totality" issue- many put up with
>> limitations because they prefer the "whole enchilada"- my wife and her
>> iPhone is an excellent example- even after a half a year with it, she
>> still
>> hates the on-screen keyboard compared to her Blackberry and old QWERTY
>> WinMo
>> phone. But as a whole, she prefers the iPhone. Similarly, lovers of the
>> iPod UI, or its integration with iTunes might make others overlook the
>> lack
>> of other features, like drag/drop, FM radio, etc., that are less
>> important
>> to them. The fact that 3rd-party hardware can replace the "missing"
>> features makes the decision to choose an iPod even easier- if I really
>> want
>> a device with an iPod UI and an FM radio, I can buy an iPod and an
>> aftermarket FM radio dongle instead of a Zune.
>
> having every possible feature is not feasible. apple picked a mix they
> thought would be best and other companies picked a different mix.
> based on sales, apple got more right than they got wrong. nothing is
> perfect, and it's good to have choices.
>
> and i never really did understand why people want an fm radio on a
> device that has all of their favourite music. a radio would play some
> songs they like, some songs they don't like, and a crapload of annoying
> commercials. plus, with the iphone/ipod touch, there are streaming
> radio apps so one can get not just local radio stations, but radio
> stations from anywhere in the world.
>
> personally, i'd want an *am* radio rather than fm so i could get news,
> sports, traffic, etc. but i can do that with an app so it's not really
> a big deal.
>
>> >> The features that the iPhone lacks are integral to the design, and are
>> >> not as easy to work around.
>> >
>> > such as?
>>
>> Lack of storage card expansion, non-swappable battery, etc. would be
>> features not easy to work around, as opposed to, say, support of more
>> file
>> formats, that could theoretically be compensated for by additional
>> software
>> (either on the device, or on a computer for format conversion prior to
>> transferring.)
>
> true, but that goes back to how many people want those features. you
> said yourself that your wife gets more than a day of battery use and
> wouldn't carry another battery anyway, so the lack of a swappable
> battery is moot. why include it if few people are going to use it?
>
> as for storage, most people don't have more than 4 gig or so of music
> based on apple's research, so 8-16 gig (and likely to be twice that in
> the next model) is more than enough. sure, some people will want more
> but where do you draw the line? i know someone for whom a 160 gig ipod
> is not enough for his music.
>
> more file formats is valid though, but that is a software issue and is
> easily solved.
>
>> >> Of course Apple is perfectly free to change the iPhone design so that
>> >> it isn't intentionally limited in the ways that all the experts are
>> >> talking about.
>> >
>> > intentionally limited? if it's so limited, why is it selling so well?
>> > aren't people finding it to be limiting?
>>
>> Sure they are- but again, it's the totality issue. My wife is frustrated
>> with the on-screen keyboard, the inability to download a large app over
>> cellular data, and that she can't use Pandora while checking email.
>
> the app limit over cell is an arbitrary limit, but there aren't really
> that many apps that are larger than 10 meg so it doesn't affect that
> many people. how often does she buy a large app?

The point is your paying for a _Unlimited_ data plan which has limits.

If an app uses to much data they don't allow it. Try to update your
installed apps. If there are a few you go over the limit.
>
>> However, with the Blackberry she hates the barebones WAP browser, with
>> her
>> WinMo T-Mobile Dash, she hated the need for an audio adapter to use
>> standard
>> headphones. (She lost 3 or 4 of them before giving up on using it as a
>> media player- it became essentially an "email machine" for her.)
>
> the proprietary headphone jack is bizarre. what *were* they thinking?

"Kevin Weaver" <kevinkeithweaver@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:tg4Vl.34439$ZP4.4900@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com...

>> the app limit over cell is an arbitrary limit, but there aren't really
>> that many apps that are larger than 10 meg so it doesn't affect that
>> many people. how often does she buy a large app?
>
> The point is your paying for a _Unlimited_ data plan which has limits.
>
> If an app uses to much data they don't allow it. Try to update your
> installed apps. If there are a few you go over the limit.

I haven't noticed that. The limit seems to be per app, not aggregated. So
you could theoretically update twenty 5MB apps in a single session, but not
be allowed to update a single 10MB app! That logic probably makes sense in
Cupertino, I guess... ;-)

"Todd Allcock" <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote in message
news:xCeVl.78971$0S.63789@newsfe22.iad...
>
> "Kevin Weaver" <kevinkeithweaver@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:tg4Vl.34439$ZP4.4900@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com...
>
>>> the app limit over cell is an arbitrary limit, but there aren't really
>>> that many apps that are larger than 10 meg so it doesn't affect that
>>> many people. how often does she buy a large app?
>>
>> The point is your paying for a _Unlimited_ data plan which has limits.
>>
>> If an app uses to much data they don't allow it. Try to update your
>> installed apps. If there are a few you go over the limit.
>
> I haven't noticed that. The limit seems to be per app, not aggregated.
> So you could theoretically update twenty 5MB apps in a single session, but
> not be allowed to update a single 10MB app! That logic probably makes
> sense in Cupertino, I guess... ;-)
>
>
That is what my friend told me that has one. He said he checked for updates
and had around 5 that needed updates.
But when he tried to get the updates it said something about it being over
the limit.

"Kevin Weaver" <kevinkeithweaver@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:04fVl.18056$jZ1.7869@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com...
>
>
> "Todd Allcock" <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote in message
> news:xCeVl.78971$0S.63789@newsfe22.iad...
>>
>> "Kevin Weaver" <kevinkeithweaver@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>> news:tg4Vl.34439$ZP4.4900@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>
>>>> the app limit over cell is an arbitrary limit, but there aren't really
>>>> that many apps that are larger than 10 meg so it doesn't affect that
>>>> many people. how often does she buy a large app?
>>>
>>> The point is your paying for a _Unlimited_ data plan which has limits.
>>>
>>> If an app uses to much data they don't allow it. Try to update your
>>> installed apps. If there are a few you go over the limit.
>>
>> I haven't noticed that. The limit seems to be per app, not aggregated.
>> So you could theoretically update twenty 5MB apps in a single session,
>> but not be allowed to update a single 10MB app! That logic probably
>> makes sense in Cupertino, I guess... ;-)
>>
>>
> That is what my friend told me that has one. He said he checked for
> updates and had around 5 that needed updates.
> But when he tried to get the updates it said something about it being over
> the limit.

Interesting- I wonder if it just craps out when it hits the first 10MB app.
I don't remember what happened the last time I tried "update all" with a big
app in the mix. Generally I update them individually to avoid the big ones
from gumming up the works, or just do it from the PC.

In article <h01nb1$dac$1@aioe.org>, Todd Allcock
<elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote:

> True. Again, I'm agreeing with your basic premise- the iPod outsells other
> players _despite_ not having the most features. It has a basic set of
> desired features coupled with a nice user experience.

exactly. a nice user experience is not a checklist item, but it *is*
something that a lot of people want.

> I'm just saying there
> is a market, albeit a smaller one, desiring more features.

and one which apple is ok with satisfying most people and letting
someone else fill in the gaps. with iphone os 3 there is very likely
to be a *lot* of accessories.

> Perhaps those features are being used by the people you see without iPods-
> the Zune and Sansa owners, for example. (Besides, other than maybe a
> plug-in FM radio, the other accessories, like remote controls, aren't likely
> to be used regularly by joggers and commuters.)

actually, a remote is ideal for joggers because they aren't going to
want to fumble for their ipod while jogging. there's even a ski jacket
that has an ipod connector in an inside pocket and buttons on the
sleeve. i think that's why apple went with the buttonless shuffle and
the controls on the headphones. the remote is a good idea but i think
it's stupid to make the ipod buttonless. in any event it's apparently
selling well.

> Agreed. The folly, IMO, is the assumption that missing features are
> unimportant/unwanted, just because the best selling device doesn't have
> them. I still think there's a large pentup demand for an iPhone with an
> HTC-style sliding keyboard, for example. Not as big a demand as the current
> form factor, and perhaps not enough of a demand for Apple to bother
> fragmenting their manufacturing to offer one (offering a limited number of
> device variants has significant cost benefits) but a significant demand
> nonetheless.

the problem with a dedicated keyboard is that the layout is not
flexible. you get specific keys with permanent labels in fixed
positions. plus the device is thicker and there are more mechanical
parts to break. on the other hand, people like the feel of physical
buttons.

with an onscreen keyboard you can have any key arrangement, with any
character set including just a number pad, or even with dedicated
buttons like the .com shortcut key. unfortunately, there's no api for
custom keyboards, so that flexibility is not as good as it could be.

> If the 3.0 software allows for it, I suspect we'll see a
> small, thin, keyboard as one of the early hot-selling dock-connector
> accessories, if someone builds one that somehow connects _attractively_ to
> the iPhone in landscape mode. (If not, you're fully authorized to say "I
> told you so!") ;-)

oh it'll happen and i suspect there will be a bunch of third party
hardware announcements next week and in the weeks that follow. i'm
sure there will be a keyboard as well as cf/sd card readers. put the
keyboard into a flip style case and you have a winner.

> Well, we could always rehash the eventual
> replacement-without-sending-it-to-Apple debate, but most people do change
> devices often enough to mitigate that. But it might make, say, handing down
> my wife's iPhone to my son or daughter harder when she upgrades to a newer
> model someday. There will be a day when an iPhone 2G isn't worth the $70 it
> costs to factory-replace the battery. But even the oldest Palm Treo is
> still worth more than the $5-10 an aftermarket battery costs.

maybe. they still go for a *lot* on ebay, mainly because they can be
unlocked without concern of relocking as with the 3g. by the time the
iphone 2g goes for $70, there will be a *lot* better iphones out there.
also, by that time the replacement battery might be cheaper. i've seen
batteries for the original ipod selling for $10, new.

> Plus, while my wife wouldn't ordinarily swap batteries, she would in
> extraordinary circumstances. She took a four hour flight this morning, and
> presumably used her iPhone for entertainment. After four hours of movie
> playback, she'd wouldn't be able to make it the rest of the day if she
> didn't carry an auxillary battery-powered charger with her when traveling:

and how often does she do that? apple makes a laptop that gets 8 hours
of battery life and there are flights that are 12+ hours. most people
don't take long flights all that often, so it's not really a huge
issue.

> > the app limit over cell is an arbitrary limit,
>
> Exactly. Completely arbitrary. which makes it that much more annoying! The
> ability to do large data downloads should be between me and my cell carrier,
> not me and my phone manufacturer! T-Mobile controlled that at the network
> level- the lower-end data plans had a 1MB download limit as a function of
> the data plan. My phone manufacture should butt out if my carrier doesn't
> have a problem with it. This is why I often joke that the iPhone "forgets"
> who owns it.

that limit is odd. out of the box the iphone can stream youtube all
day long but a single 10 meg purchase is blocked.

> However, you'd be surprised at the number of games (and, therefore, updates
> for previously downloaded games!) that exceed 10MB. I know I was. Of the
> forty or so apps on her phone, I think 4 or 5 are over 10MB. 10% isn't a
> huge number, but it's hardly insignificant, either.

games tend to have a lot of graphics and sound, so they tend to be
bigger. don't try buying myst (727 meg) over a cell connection.

> > the proprietary headphone jack is bizarre. what *were* they thinking?
>
> They use the same excuse iPhone fans do about the non-removeable battery and
> lack of flash-card slot: "space considerations." The iPhone 2G is only
> slightly better in that regard- my wife forgot her Sony ("works with the
> iPhone") noise-cancelling headphones on the trip we took last weekend. Of
> the five pairs of headphones I found packed in my travel bag and/or laying
> around the car, NONE fit the recessed jack on the 2G. We took my car
> instead of hers, so we didn't have the adapter she leaves plugged into her
> car radio's auxillarly input cord, so she went a three-day weekend (in a
> cabin without TV!) unable to use the iPhone as an iPod.

that was idiotic and they got a *lot* of flack for that one. they're
not immune to screwing up. round mouse anyone?

In article <xCeVl.78971$0S.63789@newsfe22.iad>, Todd Allcock
<elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote:

> I haven't noticed that. The limit seems to be per app, not aggregated. So
> you could theoretically update twenty 5MB apps in a single session, but not
> be allowed to update a single 10MB app! That logic probably makes sense in
> Cupertino, I guess... ;-)

it's the same logic the tsa uses at airports. you can take four 3
ounce bottles of liquid but you can't take three 4 ounce bottles.

Todd Allcock wrote:
> At 28 May 2009 18:47:47 -0700 SMS wrote:
>> Just when AT&T was fretting about declining iPhone sales, Verizon
>> dropped a bomb today with its announcement that they'll have the Palm
>> Pre after Sprint's six month exclusivity arrangement expires, as well
>> as an Android O/S smart phone.
>>
>> All the experts agree that the Palm Pre and G1 far outperform the
>> current iPhone 3G, what isn't known yet is how well the upcoming iPhone
>> refresh will address the issues with the iPhone.
>
>
> "All the experts" probably also agree that regardless of how much more
> functionality the Pre or Android phone(s) have, the phone with the half-
> eaten fruit silkscreened on the back will outsell them. Look at the iPod-
> despite more featured media players on the market, the iPod outsells
> them all.

Part of the appeal of the iPod is the iTunes store, since only the iPod
plays the M4P format without having to re-encode the song to another format.