“What does Apple’s iPhone have in common with the failed Apple Newton of more than a decade ago? Nothing. Yet,” David Haskin blogs for Computerworld.
Haskin writes, “But I was reminded of the Newton lately and how, despite its current hot streak, Apple doesn’t have an unblemished record when it comes to introducing innovative new devices. And the company may well be making some of the same mistakes now as it made in 1993 when it introduced Newton.”
“Apple seems to be repeating the cycle again with iPhone, developing what is undoubtedly an advanced product with a remarkable interface and overcharging for it. A recent survey found that a minuscule number of consumers would pay $500 for a 4 GB iPhone. It’s a good reminder that, for all their noise, Apple fanatics truly are a small percentage of the overall technology marketplace,” Haskin writes.
Haskin writes, “Besides overcharging for iPhone, Apple faces significant competition, something it didn’t face in 1993 when it launched Newton.”
“It’s also becoming clear that Apple may be suffering from excessive hubris. That is evident by its strong demands on its partner in the U.S., Cingular/AT&T. The demands, including a slice of the cellular revenues and control of the sales channel, were so strong that Verizon Wireless turned the deal down,” Haskin writes.
Haskin writes, “I’m more convinced than ever that, after an initial frenzy of publicity and sales to early adopters, iPhone sales will be unspectacular. If Apple doesn’t respond quickly by lowering the price and making nice to AT&T, which surely will be ticked off, iPhone may well become Apple’s next Newton.”
Full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “sketchtrain” for the heads up.]
There’s so much wrong with this — from reliance on tiny survey’s that asked undisclosed questions to Verizon-planted stories about how they “turned down” the iPhone — that we’re not even going to bother. Rest assured, Haskin’s opinion has been duly iCal’ed for future reference.
Related articles:
Goldman Sachs: 4 reasons to be bullish on Apple’s iPhone – February 26, 2007
Apple airs iPhone teaser ad during Oscars – February 25, 2007
Apple preps 3G iPhone model for Europe – February 25, 2007
Apple’s iPhone pricing: too high or too low? – February 24, 2007
Survey shows Apple’s iPhone a tad too expensive? – February 23, 2007
The once-mighty Palm Inc. doomed to decline and failure – thanks to Apple’s iPhone – February 23, 2007
Palm CEO can’t stop talking about Apple iPhone – February 19, 2007
How Steve Jobs played hardball in iPhone deal with AT&T (Cingular) – February 17, 2007
RUMOR: Apple iPhone 4GB for $299, 8GB for $399 with 2-year AT&T contract? – February 16, 2007
Telstra exec tells Apple to ‘stick to its knitting’ as iPhone looms – February 15, 2007
Digit takes a closer look at Apple’s iPhone – February 14, 2007
Microsoft caught off-guard, beaten badly by Apple’s iPhone innovations – February 13, 2007
Palm CEO: ‘We don’t want to follow design fads’; Nokia CEO challenges Apple over iPhone – February 13, 2007
RIM co-CEO doesn’t see threat from Apple’s iPhone – February 12, 2007
Apple’s soon-to-be iPhone rivals sound just like iPod rivals circa 2001 – February 01, 2007
How Verizon blew the Apple iPhone deal – January 29, 2007
O2, Vodafone, Orange, T-Mobile battle for exclusive rights to Apple iPhone in UK – January 26, 2007
Rogers to offer Apple iPhone exclusively in Canada – January 25, 2007
FUD Alert: Apple iPhone ‘isn’t very practical’ and a ‘security risk’ for business – January 24, 2007
Research in Motion downgraded due to Apple iPhone competition – January 23, 2007
Ihnatko: Hands-on with Apple’s iPhone (which runs Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard) – January 18, 2007
Microsoft CEO Ballmer laughs at Apple iPhone – January 17, 2007
RealMoney: Apple just blew up the whole damn mobile-phone supply chain with its new iPhone – January 11, 2007
eWeek: Apple iPhone fallout: ‘They must be crying in Nokia-ville and other telephony towns today’ – January 10, 2007
Jefferies downgrades Motorola on fears of market share loss to Apple iPhone – January 10, 2007
The massive FUD campaign against Apple’s iPhone ramps up – January 10, 2007
Time: ‘iPhone could crush cell phone market pitilessly beneath the weight of its own superiority’ – January 09, 2007
Analyst: Apple iPhone should be given its own category – ‘brilliantphone’ – January 09, 2007
Apple debuts iPhone: touchscreen mobile phone + widescreen iPod + Internet communicator – January 09, 2007
Time will tell!!
Initially, I thought the iPhone was really cool, but that ended quickly after I added up how much I would have to spend to get into bed with Cingular (now AT&T). No thanks, Apple.
The iPhone is way too expensive IMO. All I need is a cell phone to make the odd phone call. I don’t need an iPod on a cell phone- that’s what I bought a fscking iPod for.
Get ready to dig up that iCal in a few months MDN!
I’m glad that “iCal’ed” isn’t just a word me and my mac friends use.
James needs to chill out
Jeez, I dont even post that often on here and somebody already thinks I’m a legend
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”LOL” style=”border:0;” />
I think it all depends on how quickly they are gonna be able to reduce the price. I would love one but I know I wont be able to afford one when it first comes out.
Mdn Word: Hope, as in hopefully it wont be this expensive for too long.
Sorry David Haskin, you are in a different time zone. We are in a New World Order. Computer savvy people have increased tremendously.
Boy its cold in here…and I have gas.
iPhone
Therefor I am…
…not wasting my time on articles and FUD like this!
The iPhone will be a success because it copied the amazing Windows Vista ad but using the word “Hello” instead.
Apple sure knows how to copy ideas from successful companies dont they?
My take:
The Newton was a product way ahead of its time, where technology was expensive and the demand for a PDA was inexistent.
So, the Newton was aiming for a consumer segment which was inexistent – so to create the product AND the consumer segment were challenges.
The iPhone, on the other hand, has a very well defined consumer segment: smartphone users. And from there it will spread to phone users. So, yes, the iPhone is a smartphone (too), but it’s a revolutionary kind of smartphone, with technology not seen before in a single device.
This can be reflected on the demand. Nobody was saying “I can’t wait for the Newton to come out to buy one”, but I see a lot of “I can’t wait for the iPhone to come out”.
Plus, as I mentioned before, Apple is aiming for only 1% marketshare. If they achieve that goal (and I believe they will surpass it), then the iPhone will be a success.
Dang! I should start writing tech columns instead of Enderle, Dvorak and all those losers!
James,
Even though I think the new technology introduced with the iPhone is great, I don’t plan to buy one either (right away) because I, too, use my cell phone for making calls. Others, however, can’t live without their “smart phone.” I think the iPhone will exceed Apple’s conservative sales expectations, even at $500-600 each. The price will eventually come down with the introduction of newer models with different functional capabilities. The deal-breaker for me is not the $500 startup cost, but the monthly AT&T bill that will be required to use the phone. What will THAT be? Your guess is as good as mine!
Except that the iPhone is a phone and can use the internet. In other words it can connect with the outside world and find information for you. The Newton couldn’t do that. That makes a huge difference. The Newton was just a fancy notepad.
1. The Treo cost over $500 when it came out.
2. The iPod cost $400 when it came out (at 5GB), and a few months later the 20GB iPod 1G was $500.
David Haskin is trolling for hit counts, ignore him
This is not for teenagers or moms.
This phone is for business users. They will drop $700 if it does what they say it does, and line up for it.
Look at it another way. How many teenagers do you see with a Palm Treo?
Exactly
He conveniently overlooks the fact that none of Apple’s management (and probably few employees) was at Apple when the Newton was launched.
He also doesn’t seem to understand the concepts inflation and the time value of money. $700 in 1993 was a lot more money than $500 today. The real value of that $700 would be $970 today. That is a faily big difference, ignoring completely the higher value of the iPhone based on functionality.
What he didn’t say was what he thought the Newton should have been priced at. The iPhones $500 price today is equivelent to $355 in 1993, or HALF the cost of the Newton.
Besides a falling price—which will obviously help ANY product (duh!)—the iPhone is still very much cheaper than the Newton was in it’s day. If the interface is intuitive as the iPod’s (compared to the competition) it will blow everything else away. All Apple has to do is create a nice price spectrum like it did with the iPod.
The other thing is that the iPhone might become secondary to the OS and the interface introduced in the iPhone. Mac OS X in a 4 gig footprint could easily revolutionize many different product catagories—audio systems (pro and consumer), gaming systems, video systems, autos, security systems, etc.
“It’s also becoming clear that Apple may be suffering from excessive hubris. That is evident by its strong demands on its partner in the U.S., Cingular/AT&T. The demands, including a slice of the cellular revenues and control of the sales channel, were so strong that Verizon Wireless turned the deal down,”
How exactly are the strong demands from Apple going to stop consumers from buying the iPhone? Yes, I know some people do not like Cingular, but some people do not like Verizon, either. Apple seems to have wanted an exclusive contract with a carrier, so no matter what, some consumers were not going to be happy with the carrier.
I would say that Apple’s “strong demands” are actually one of the drawing points. It is good to have hardware manufacturers that make demands on the carriers to get better features and more flexibility, eg visual voicemail. I, for one, am glad that a hardware manufacturer is not going to cripple their hardware and features so the telecos can make a few more dollars a year from me.
Sure, the pricepoint is high, but as many have pointed out, it is similar to most top end smartphones (but with more flash memory) and all such devices drop in price over time.
The Newton had revolutionary technology BUT it was notoriously buggy until it was just about phased out. (Remember the Doonesburry cartoons making fun of the Newton?
I doubt Steve Jobs will let that happen with the iPhone.
A phone with an intuitive interface will seem almost magical. (Just like the original Mac compared to the PC.)
Grifterus wrote:
…and the demand for a PDA was inexistent…..
“Dang! I should start writing tech columns instead of Enderle, Dvorak and all those losers!”
If you think “inexistent” is a word, perhaps you would do well in the PC world. – Remember: In real life “Spelling Counts”
……………
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
On the iphone issue; I’m waiting for the critter. I don’t know if I’ll be an “early adopter” but I’ll certainly be in the pool by the time the second generation is introduced. I think it’s a bargain at $500.00. Being able to have a single device synch my iAddress book, my iCalendar, and my iTunes is a pretty cool thing. The fact that it can make telephone calls is just magic.
Frankly, I think the iPhone will make huge money for Apple. I expect the preliminary 1% market share is simply their typical overly conservative approach to profit forcasting. We’ve seen it elsewhere in Apple.
Buy Apple stock!!! – no kidding. even at $88 it’s a bargain.
Unbelievable…the so called experts are usually experts only at saying things will not work..
How many times have they said what Apple is doing will not work? When the iPod first came out, they wrote the same type of bullsh*t. They said the iPod was way too expensive. They never learn! Timing is more important than price. I think someone once said…”There is nothing like an idea whose time has come”.
I think the timing is right for the iPod…I think Apple has made a few mistakes with the first device…but they will correct it later.
I would venture that Apple’s plan would include having a high price to limit the adoption of the iPhone initially to better adapt the the dynamics of the celluar market…refine the strategy and then release a variety of iPhones at different price points like they did with the iPod.
For sure you will see prices in the 299 range and better contracts afterwards. They first round device is to learn from and refine the strategy.
I don’t believe many of these experts have the talent to turn around a company like Apple…that’s why they sit around pretending like they can.
Also, the Newton was not one of Job’s projects, I hear he killed it when he came back to Apple…Job’s is much more experienced than he was 10 years ago!
We should learn from the past….not re-live it.
For a guy who claims to have closely followed Apple’s product, Hastin certainly sounds like one of the nay-sayers who panned the original iPod. “Who would pay $400 for an MP3 player?” Indeed. We all saw how that went. Turned out that quite a lot of people would pay a high price for an MP3 player – as long as it was done well.
There is no doubt that the 1st generation iPhone is an expensive bit of kit. But it would be remarkably short sighted and ignorant to claim that this will always be the case. Over time, features will mature, capacity will increase and the price will go down. I’d also bet the exclusive contract with Cingular will not be renewed once the cell phone service providers come crawling to Steve Jobs for a piece of the iPhone pie.
I would also expect that such an astute student of Apple product history as Hastin claims to be would have noticed that the Newton enjoys a fan club that continues to support Newton software long after Apple abandoned the project. Originally released in 1993, the newton lives on:
http://www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,54580,00.html
I don’t think Mr. Haskin did much research on the subject of the Newton. More likely he’s just trolling for hits. I hear lots of tech journalists bait MacHeads to get more site traffic.
And, no, I didn’t click the link!
upcoming product…
compared to failure product…
could upcoming product = failure…?
lets speculate!
add a dash of pessimism… yay!