“There are a couple glaring mysteries surrounding Apple’s new iPhone, announced this week at Macworld — the name and the Internet connection speed,” Robert X. Cringley writes for PBS.
“If you’ve been in a coma the last several days, you may not have heard about Apple’s iPhone, which is a combination mobile phone, iPod, and Internet access device,” Cringley writes. “The iPhone is cool; the iPhone is neat; the iPhone is weird in a couple of ways. You know it isn’t even close to being the most expensive mobile phone on the market, for all the grousing I’ve read about the price. My Nokia N.93, which was technically not available yet in the U.S. until recently, but could be freely found in the United States of eBay, costs substantially more at around $800.”
“What’s weird about the iPhone is, first, its name, since iPhone is a registered trademark of Cisco Systems,” Cringley writes. “What makes these trademark shenanigans all the more peculiar is that at the same MacWorld show this week Apple introduced another product called Apple TV, which it first demonstrated last year under the name iTV… If an iTV can become an Apple TV, why can’t an iPhone become an Apple Phone? I think it will.”
“So why did Apple start this fight in the first place? Publicity,” Cringley writes. “…Apple secrecy creates free publicity. And so does this iPhone naming fiasco. Apple already has a fallback position created by the iTV-to-Apple TV transformation, so I’m guessing that sometime soon Apple will either pay Cisco a LOT of money for the name or Apple’s iPhone will be transformed into the Apple Phone. Either way, every mobile phone user on Earth will have heard that Apple is now in the mobile phone business. Very clever.”
“This leaves us with the mystery of why Apple deliberately hobbled the cellular Internet capability of its iPhone,” Cringley writes. “The iPhone is this amazing connectivity quad-mode device that can probably make use of as much bandwidth as it can get, so making it suck through the little straw that is EDGE makes no sense from a user perspective… Cingular has a 3G network called BroadbandConnect or “MediaNet” if you buy Cingular’s associated Cingular Video service. And there’s the problem — Cingular Video, which is based on RealVideo, NOT QuickTime or H.264. Apple wants the iPhone to get its content primarily through iTunes, ideally by syncing with a Mac or Windows PC.”
“Cingular wants an iPhone exclusive and is probably paying Apple money for that privilege. Apple doesn’t want Cingular Video… I’m sure discussions are taking place right now with Cingular where Apple is arguing that the carrier should make its video service iTunes-compatible,” Cringley writes. “The media and the market’s ecstatic response to the iPhone will put strong pressure on Cingular, which has what is apparently a multiyear exclusive with Apple. If Cingular gives in, as I’m sure it will, the iPhones will suddenly become faster and have more features.”
Tons more in the full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “LinuxGuy and Mac Prodigal Son” for the heads up.]
A lot can change between now and June when iPhone, or whatever it’s called, ships.
Related articles:
Apple’s Phil Schiller gives CBS News hands-on tour of iPhone – January 12, 2007
20 unanswered questions about Apple’s iPhone – January 11, 2007
Report: iPhone could be upgraded to 3G with software update if Apple wishes – January 11, 2007
Report: Rogers Communications to offer Apple iPhone in Canada – January 11, 2007
David Pogue: hands on preview of Apple’s iPhone, ‘gorgeous and so packed with possibilities’ – January 11, 2007
PC Magazine hands-on test of Apple iPhone: multi-touch UI ‘takes the breath away’ – January 11, 2007
Mossberg’s initial take on Apple iPhone: ‘radical and gorgeous’ with ‘brilliant new user interface’ – January 11, 2007
NewsWeek’s Levy interviews Apple CEO Steve Jobs about iPhone – January 11, 2007
Why Apple’s iPhone doesn’t do high-speed mobile phone networks (yet) – January 11, 2007
RealMoney: Apple just blew up the whole damn mobile-phone supply chain with its new iPhone – January 11, 2007
ZDNet: Hands on with Apple’s iPhone: ‘elegant, ravishing, simple, sleek; impeccable & intuitive UI’ – January 11, 2007
Apple iPhone FUD campaign begins – January 10, 2007
Nine ways Apple changed the face of consumer electronics yesterday – January 10, 2007
Analysts and investors applaud arrival of Apple iPhone – January 10, 2007
Top 10 things to love and top 10 things to hate about the Apple iPhone – January 10, 2007
How Apple kept the iPhone top secret for 30 months – January 10, 2007
Hands-on with Apple’s iPhone – January 10, 2007
The only thing really wrong with Apple’s iPhone is its name – January 09, 2007
Is Apple building ‘The Device?’ [revisited] – January 09, 2007
Analyst Bajarin: Apple’s iPhone and Apple TV are industry game changers – January 09, 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
Cingular to use Synchronoss Technologies’ platform for Apple iPhone – January 09, 2007
iPhone photos from Apple’s Macworld Expo booth – January 09, 2007
Enderle: Apple’s iPhone is going to do very well – January 09, 2007
Apple debuts iPhone: touchscreen mobile phone + widescreen iPod + Internet communicator – January 09, 2007
FUD Alert: Analyst – I am pretty skeptical Apple’s iPhone can succeed – January 11, 2007
The Register’s Ray: Apple ‘iPhone’ will fail – December 26, 2006
Analyst: Apple iPhone economics aren’t that compelling – December 08, 2006
CNET editor Kanellos: ‘Apple iPhone will largely fail’ – December 07, 2006
Palm CEO laughs off Apple ‘iPhone’ threat – November 20, 2006
I think at this stage, they’ve now got enough publicity that they could stop using iPhone and the general public would still refer to it as such regardless of what they renamed it as. People were calling it that before it was even announced and now they know a phone exists it just validates the assumption. Alternatively people who don’t know any better will just call it the iPod phone.
Speculate all you want – intelligently, even, but only very few know what’s up with the two of them.
Right now, Apple requires a person to use iTunes as the portal through which they buy content. It’s THE browser. I’d bet that in time, there will be a mobile version that allows the same. First things first.
Why still speaking about ‘phone’all the time?
it is a (very small, portable0 computer, which allows you to make a phonecall as well (among may other functions).
It will soon replace the purse with all money and creditcards too.
Cingular? Must be talking ’bout AT&T Wireless something-or-other, natch.
But Cringley isn’t stretching much this time. At least vis-a-vis the name change to Apple phone on release. Many have speculated similarly.
While idrinking my iCoffee, I think Apple should itrademark, ipatent, and iown the letter “i”.
It will stay iPhone because the primary tie in and the inital target consumer is the iPod and the iPod owner. For many (particularly the early adopters) they will see it as an iPod with phone capabiliteis, hence the iPhone.
A friend of mine asked if the iPhone would have a vibrate mode. Jokingly I responded, “It has this new thing called ‘Tingle’ which allows you to just ‘get the feeling’ that someone’s calling.”
Then I started thinking…I bet you ( and by you I mean scientists who’ve dedicated their lives to the research) could have it emit some kind of real low energy electromagnetic pulse tuned to your brainwaves (obviously in a completely benign way) alerting you of a call. Only you would “hear” it. It would probably be too hard to transmit words this way, but beeps or buzzes could be plausible. Then people could send morse code text messages you could privately “hear” without even taking out your iPhone.
Thoughts?
Hey Steve…got a job for me?
It’s so much more than a phone, should be something different.
Whew! Now that the iPhone dazzle has somewhat faded, the implications of this device have been battering me for the last two days. I honestly believe that the iPhone is merely the tip of the iceberg, and that Apple’s “Welcome to 2007” announcement is only a hint of what’s to come.
I saw this demo by the Multi-Touch research group last year (watch the video!), and I only remembered about it when John Gruber mentioned it on Daring Fireball this morning. A new announcement on the site says that they saw the keynote and they have a lot of “exciting stuff” coming soon. Exciting indeed.
For instance: What version of OS X is the iPhone running? Is this what Leopard’s new interface will look like? Obviously, Apple has the multi-touch interface in play; I find it extremely unlikely that they haven’t thought of much greater use for it than just a cellphone display, and the thought of such an interface on a full-blown desktop display boggles the mind. Also, can anyone say, “Mac Tablet”? I knew you could.
Multi-touch technology doesn’t just allow us to interact with a computer in a new way, it enables entirely new classes of applications. The Multi-Touch group’s video demonstration also indicates to me that the Desktop metaphor will be completely fulfilled, and that the end of the mouse is near. For those who don’t touch-type, it also obviates the need for a keyboard, as you can just pull up a virtual one if necessary. Or you could just drop into Inkwell and literally write an email with your finger or a stylus. This will be the most intuitive computer interface ever developed, and I firmly believe that this will be the new interface for Leopard.
Trust Apple’s interface wizards to pull together amazing new technologies in a way that are not just simple to use, but which make sense to the average consumer.
What Jobs didn’t say speaks volumes to me. He didn’t utter one syllable about Leopard, new Macs, or new displays. I think he’s going to drop several nukes in the coming weeks and months.
Poor Microsoft. They’ll launch Windows Vista with a multi-billion dollar ad campaign, only to see their vaunted new interface immediately rendered so last-century when Steve strafes them with Leopard.
“I think Apple should itrademark, ipatent, and iown the letter ‘i’.”
Unfortunately, the letter i (upper and lower case) and the number 4 were purchased in a hostile takeover last year by the Gates Foundation.
Since then, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting has been frantically searching for new sponsors for Sesame Street.
Actually I think the opposite is true of Apple’s decision to use the name iPhone. That is, they want to prevent confusion with Cisco’s iPhone, so they’ve deliberately created this legal firestorm so that everyone will know that there’s another company that has something called the iPhone…and so the news will yell out loud and clear when Apple gives-in and renames their phone the Apple Phone.
They needed to do this so that all the years of rumored iPhones and the association with Apple could be clarified. Remember the general public…not just apple fans…are the target for this new phone. So some, or many, may have been confused and accidently purchased a Cisco iPhone thinking they were buying the mythical Apple iPhone.
Now, by June…there’ll be virtually noway anyone will be able to avoid knowing that Cisco sells the iPhone but that what everyone wants is the Apple Phone.
why can’t an iPhone become an Apple Phone?
Because: iMac, iPod, iPhone. iMac, iPod, Apple Phone doesn’t have the same product name consistency. Apple TV is a peripheral.
With a 5-month-away ship date and a hatful of speculation and vagueries about what it will actually do, wouldn’t this qualify as MDN’s hated “Vaporware?”
Oh, riiiiight.. if it’s Apple, it’s good marketing. I forgot.
efftee, I wouldn’t quit your day job in haste.
Mr Bill: “…may have been confused and accidently purchased a Cisco iPhone thinking they were buying the mythical Apple iPhone.“
Why would the non-apple-loving general public buy a non-cellphone device they didn’t need just because they thought Apple made it?
I agree with Viridian!
From Wikipedia:
“Vaporware is software or hardware which is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge, either with or without a protracted development cycle. The term implies unwarranted optimism, or sometimes even deception; that is, it may imply that the announcer knows that product development is in too early a stage to support responsible statements about its completion date, feature set, or even feasibility.”
So you’re saying that the iPhone will not ship in June? Or are you just trolling (again)?
I find it extremely unlikely that they haven’t thought of much greater use for it than just a cellphone display, and the thought of such an interface on a full-blown desktop display boggles the mind. Also, can anyone say, “Mac Tablet”?
I don’t so much want a full blown Mac in a tablet computer more than I want a tablet to expand my existing Mac, especially if that means a price more like the iPhone than the iMac. I’d like to be able to transfer/stream web pages, PDFs, and other reading material to the tablet and then sit on the couch or at the dinner table and read. I’d like to be able to transfer art files to the tablet and then work on it, using a stylus (which it can recognize as such), my fingers of the other hand, and Painter. Corel and Wacom should really look into how this tech can enhance Painter’s already fantastic naturalistic feel, that is if they haven’t already. Given the iPhone, I wouldn’t mind if the tablet could be used for answering my home phone, too.
It’s obvious now that Apple is getting ready to change the whole “i” naming scheme to “Apple.” Remember when Steve mentioned that they wanted the word “Mac” in their computer products?
They now want their brand in the name. Don’t believe me? Think about this, the sound of “i” and “Apple” are extremely close and easy to say. That’s sort of a coincidence, because probably no one at Apple back when the iMac was introduced thought that they could eventually segue the “i” into “Apple”
It will be the Apple Phone and I’m sure lots of people have figured this out. Cringley’s not telling me or a lot of people anything we hadn’t already figured out.
Plus, I have to agree with a previous poster that this keeps people from accidently buying the C(r)isco version. By the time it’s released, it will be the Apple Phone. They will announce this when they feel it needs to be announced. I think they are waiting for the right time to keep the buzz going. It may be announced at the next special event, in addition to whatever goodies they have.
And that multitouch video Viridian linked to is awesome.
Cisco’s iPhone refers to VoIP, not a revolutionary new multi-featured mobile phone. There are those who are confident Cisco will not win their suit, and I’m one of these. There are any number of products with identical names, iPrint and iWork are examples. Much as I like Cisco, I think they’re trying to get on the band wagon here, telling Apple they want a piece of their action or they’ll sue. It’s preposterous.
Apple’s stock didn’t jump 11 points in 2 days because the investor commmunity is worried about the lawsuit. If they add 3G before it ships, all the better. That’s a feature a few people have been whining about, so better to add it and shut them up too.
” . . . this keeps people from accidently buying the C(r)isco version.”
There’s probably a few people out there that ordered routers and ended up with a can of vegetable oil shortening.
Just call the thing ‘iDo’. Which means-universal language. Google iDo.
Truth Decay: “So you’re saying that the iPhone will not ship in June? Or are you just trolling (again)?”
Per your own source, wikipedia says “it may imply that the announcer knows that product development is in too early a stage to support responsible statements about its completion date, feature set, or even feasibility.“
MDN has repeatedly suggested that they believe there will be significant changes to the feature set that was announced/demonstrated on Tuesday. Try reading all the way to the period.
As usual, anyone who doesn’t fall in step is a troll. You’re only emboldening the actual trolls (Zune Tang, etc.) when you do that.
Unsquirted: LOL ….er…SqUiRt!
Will y’all please stop referring to Robert X. Cringley as if there was an actual person named Robert X. Cringley?
Real content streams better than QuickTime- way better. It also looks better at a given bit-rate. I have great cable broadband and an p to date Mac, so don’t go down that path.
PC Apologist?
There IS a a responsible completion date, it’s Q4 ’07 and there IS a feature set, it’s posted over at http://www.apple.com/iphone/
Also, and as the device has been publically demo’d, we know it’s feasible. Where you’re obviously confused, is that a RUMOR SITE is claiming that the “feature set” and such are subject to change, not the manufacturer of said device.
I suggest reading the fine print at the bottom of Apple’s page;
“This device has not been authorized as required by the rules of the Federal Communications Commission. This device is not, and may not be, offered for sale or lease, or sold or leased, until authorization is obtained.”
Seems to me, the hold up is with FCC certifications, and not the phone.
Cringley, whoever he really is, actually makes sense for once. Must be back on the meds.
Microsoft’s ZUNE Phone
From what I read, Cisco Systems owns the iPhone trademark in the U.S., Apple owns the worldwide trademark. By Apple announcing a product, that puts Cisco notice.
Apple meanwhile will change the name to Apple Phone and leave Cisco holding the bag.
Moral of the story,
Don’t screw with Steve!
To PC Apologist:
Re: What Bob said.
Ditto.
(Thanks, Bob. Well said.)
effwerd,
“I’d like to be able to transfer/stream web pages, PDFs, and other reading material to the tablet and then sit on the couch or at the dinner table and read.”
As if there haven’t been enough rumors around lately, I’ve heard a rumor that flexible displays are going to be attainable in the next couple of years or so. Imagine your scenario but with a flexible display… Like in the movie Minority Report, or Mission to Mars.
“Apple Phone” makes more sense than “iPhone” at this point. Looks like new Apple products will loose the “i”. And for that, I am glad.
This way, billions of companies out there can’t copy the “Apple” like they did the “i”.
posts of PC Apologist once again confirm why PC users are still willing to pay Microsoft to run Windows on their PC.
Tardiness.
PC Apologist, either you are stupid, can’t read english, have literacy problems or daft. Your choice.
Opps, sorry. You evidently are incapable of make an informed choice: you use Windows.
product development is in too early a stage to support responsible statements about its completion date
Buddy, have you watched Steve Jobs keynote and the demo of some of the iPhone *main* features? The product was then given to journalist to play with after the keynote. David Pogue had it for an hour and did a preview of it (since it will still have month to complete development and capabilities).
Completion dates? Jobs gave the full delivery road map. Where you in a coma, had your hed up Bill Gates’ ass and only heard intestine noises or what?
Can anyone be more of a lobster these days than Windows users?
Get back in line for your Vista box. Oh, there’s no line at all.
Apple Phone works for me…in fact, I’m f-ing sick of the “i” in front of everything, everywhere.
Apple Phone…I’m starting to fall in love with it…
Apple rolls out this “thing” and says that they have revolutionized the mobile phone market? Ha. Until they start to INNOVATE, I won’t be impressed. Hell, it doesn’t even come in brown!
efftee,
Tingle? I think we are beyond that!
“May 2, 2002 London
Rats controled by implant at range of up to 500 yards have been announced today.
The remote-controlled “roborats” can be made to run, climb, jump or turn left and right through electrical probes, the width of a hair, implanted in their brains.
One of the electrodes stimulates the “feelgood” center of the rat’s brain, to reward proper actions with a “feel good” impulse. Two other electrodes activate the cerebral regions which process signals for mind control. In training, a shot of euphoria rewarded the rats for responding correctly, but after that they turned on cue without any need for reward.”
Now imagine the touch screen interface with the feelgood centre and text messaging will seem so last century.
Why not call it AppliPhone…inferring Apple, iPhone, and applications?
I’ve heard a rumor that flexible displays are going to be attainable in the next couple of years or so. Imagine your scenario but with a flexible display… Like in the movie Minority Report, or Mission to Mars.
Oh, I have, Mr. Peabody. And I can’t wait. Flexible displays would be great for reading. I’d still want a tablet for art, though.
While I think that Apple could prove that Cisco — including the companies it bought out — abandoned the trademark by not defending it over many years, Apple needs to quickly establish the trademark it will actually market. If Cisco does not utterly cave in — no payments, no access, nothing — then Apple should trademark its iPod cell phone as the “Apple Phone”, as Cringely and others suggest. This will leave Cisco with worse than nothing. The “iPhone” trademark will have been sullied by their shyster submarine lawsuit against Apple and make Cisco a laughing stock. And Cisco will fail in their main goal to get Apple to give them more access into the consumer networking infrastructure that Apple is building. SJ can flip them the bird and tell them that if Apple needs to work with a networking company, it won’t be Cisco. Screw Cisco.
As others have noticed, the name “Apple Phone” is very consistent with the “Apple TV” name. And the halo effect might well be magnified by this naming convention.
This suit is all about VoIP and breaking Cingular’s network restriction.
Something tells me that it IS going to be quite important to keep the iPhone name for this product.
Bob, Truth Decay et al –
*MDN* and its readers frequently refer to non-Apple devices (esp. competitors to ipod) as Vaporware when they are announced well in advance of their projected release date, and the feature sets are fluid. *MDN* has repeatedly since Tuesday referred to the iPhone’s feature set as likely to change significantly before its projected release.
The FCC process and the trademark battle could make great excuses not to ship it when he said. But an Apple ship-slip isn’t nearly as horrible as a Microsoft ship-slip, now IS it?
I’m give some through of late to upgrading my copy of QT 7 to QT Pro and it struck me funning that QT Pro currently offers the option of creating G3 Files for Mobile Viewing (i.e., phones as in iPhones). If G3 function is offered by OT Pro – just how long is it going to be before it’s exported to the new phone?
I’m thinking that Steve Jobs has a whole lot more up his collective “computer” sleeve that he currently letting on!
The new iPhone I’m thinking that what we saw this week is only a shallow to what is in store fore all of us in June when the “real” iPhone or should call it a apple (icon) phone shows up!
Here hoping!
By the way the line that caught my eye read…
Create 3G Files for Mobile Viewing
Output 3G files for RTSP streaming? With QuickTime 7 Pro, they’re fully interoperable with other 3G streaming handsets and delivery architectures.
I find it extremely unlikely that they haven’t thought of much greater use for it than just a cellphone display, and the thought of such an interface on a full-blown desktop display boggles the mind. Also, can anyone say, “Mac Tablet”?
I don’t so much want a full blown Mac in a tablet computer more than I want a tablet to expand my existing Mac, especially if that means a price more like the iPhone than the iMac. I’d like to be able to transfer/stream web pages, PDFs, and other reading material to the tablet and then sit on the couch or at the dinner table and read. I’d like to be able to transfer art files to the tablet and then work on it, using a stylus (which it can recognize as such), my fingers of the other hand, and Painter. Corel and Wacom should really look into how this tech can enhance Painter’s already fantastic naturalistic feel, that is if they haven’t already. Given the iPhone, I wouldn’t mind if the tablet could be used for answering my home phone, too.
I know there have been lots of rumours about Apple buying Nintendo, but what if they were looking at another Japanese company, like Wacom for instance. They are pretty small and probably wouldn’t cost Apple much, plus they supply all the magnetic touch screens for our friend Bill’s Tablet PC’s. I’d love to see a Tablet computer that was actually useful (thin, light, good user interface). Anyway I’ll be the first in the queue to buy the new Apple iphone or whatever it is going to be called, it looks so cool!