Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Apple Announcements

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Re: Apple Announcements

    Originally posted by Miulang View Post
    With the huge churn rates that happen whenever the next new phone or service crops up, it's pretty amazing to find customers who stick with a cellular phone carrier for longer than the contract period.

    Miulang
    I dont think its that amazing. unless you get bad reception or pay too much, i think most stay with a plan. these 2 year contracts theyre pushing with only 1 year warranty is for suckers tho.

    any word on buying itunes over iphone edge or wifi enabled or will it be like the irokr?
    this phone looks badass.
    i wonder if the unlocked versions will be able to support all the features?
    Aquaponics in Paradise !

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Apple Announcements

      after watching the whole ipod intro on quicktime, I get it why there needs to be an exclusive cell carrier. One feature is the ability to scroll through voicemail to select messages. Currently no such option exists with any cell carrier, so to get one on board to ramp up their technology must have meant some good wheeling/dealing. Kudos to Apple and Cingular for stepping up to that plate.

      Hangovers might be all the blog rage, but the bloggers gotta confess that the iPhone still gave a stellar first impression! And time will tell what the 3rd parties will dream up to add on to the phone, as well as how full-featured future versions of iTunes will become, considering that iTunes is the sync conduit for the iPhone. I cannot wait for June to visit the Apple Store and play with it.

      pax

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Apple Announcements

        Originally posted by NoCal Boy View Post
        Looks like they've worked out a deal with Cisco.
        Hold the (i)Phone!!!

        (Sorry, couldn't resist..)

        Maybe not:
        http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...f151203S78.DTL

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Apple Announcements

          After this thread ramped up yesterday I skipped across the parking lot to MacMouse. Rolf gave me a big screen tour of the iPhone. Wow! My Cingular contract is up in a couple of weeks and I'm probably switching to Hawaiian Telcom. But...hold the fort! Should I or shouldn't I? I mean, even this untechie tutu who is normally not overly enthusiastic about buying and learning the newest technology gave pause to reupping with Cingular and waiting impatiently for June.

          That was yesterday! After a decent night's sleep, my senses returned! I don't need an iPhone and if I got one I wouldn't use the majority of the features. I'll wait a coupla years and see what happens to the price and my needs.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Apple Announcements

            Originally posted by NoCal Boy View Post
            (Cisco Sues Apple Over Use of iPhone Name)

            Heh. Well Steve Jobs has been said to be a notoriously combative exec' behind closed doors, so that's hardly surprising.

            Perhaps Apple should have taken the "iPhone" concept one level further and introduced it simply as the succeeding (2007) iPod model. Done deal. Never mind that whimpy 8 gig hard drive (for a rediculous $500!). Make the case a little thicker and include a full-sized 80-gig HD. This would truly make it a "Jack of all trades" device. Not only would that attract celphone customers, it would also tempt current iPod/MP3 device users to trade in their current wares for the new '07 iPod just to have the enhanced touch-screen interface and video capability. THAT would be worth $500.

            Still, with Apple Inc. striving to diversify their image, it's no wonder they're so insistent on introducing an "iPhone" into their product stable.
            sigpic The Tasty Island

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Apple Announcements

              Good point, PM, about some reasons for the Cingular lock-in, particularly the non-linear voicemail thing. Unlike other handset makers, Apple wasn't going to let the provider dictate features. Whoever signed on had to know they'd be answering to Apple's whims, not vice versa, and that's gotta count for a lot.

              Here's a video from CBS News with a hands-on demo of the iPhone. It's one thing to see the slick Quicktime animations on the Apple site, which of course they could perfect and slick-up as much as they like, and another to see it in someone's hands, operating as promised.

              I love that freewheeling spin thing.

              As for the Cisco/Apple spat over " iPhone" -- it is interesting. Most folks are saying it's a slam dunk for Cisco. Not only do they own the trademark, and have the first product to market with the name, but Apple is (presumably) on record has having actively negotiated with them over use of the name, too.

              But I do think it could be a tough fight for Cisco, even if they win. I mean, people have been callng the Apple iPhone the iPhone for years, and that's before the product was announced. It was the buzz of the tech press for the last six months, again under the iPhone name. In the public's eye, the default name for any Apple cell phone was iPhone, and that's a lot of inertia for Cisco to overcome. Even if Cisco wins, and the Apple iPhone becomes the Apple iTalkPro or something... you bet your sweet bippy people will still call it the iPhone.

              I'm pretty sure from a marketing standpoint, Cisco knows it'd be easier to just sell the name and rename its own obscure product.

              But, it's the principle of the thing. And bigger companies have had to face the music over similar issues. Microsoft had to settle over a small company's claim on "Internet Explorer," and Google had to give up "Gmail" in the UK. Cisco is a slightly bigger adversary than those two faced!

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Apple Announcements

                Originally posted by pzarquon View Post
                A phone that does everything is no good to you if you don't really want to do everything, and the smartphone category is infamous for "phone and PDA" combos that do neither "phone" nor "PDA" well.
                I agree with what you've said. However, I don't think I want to sell Steve Job's short. Apple always seems to come up with good user designs.

                BUT......

                My question is how well does it do business apps? Word and Excel files? Integrate with corporate email and applications? The reason I ask is the Treo and Blackberry owners I know have them paid or at least subsidized by their company. What I see with the Apple iPhone is an entertainment device. How many are really going to pay that much for it when it's on their own dime? And how much is the service? I'll bet it's a lot more then just basic phone service. Even if people are willing to pony up for the device, will the pay for the expensive service too? Another hit if it's not well suited for business. Yes, Apple makes great user interfaces, but I think they've always struggled to make inroads to corporate America. Is this a continuation of both past successes and failures?

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Apple Announcements

                  The iPhone is pretty much a consumer device. It's a "high-end" phone, but more for the people who buy iPods and not those who buy (or rather, whose companies buy) Blackberrys. The business press is already pooh-pooing the iPhone because of the lack of business apps in the demo, but I really don't think they're Apple's target right now. Which isn't to say RIM shouldn't worry... depending on how robust the OSX derivative is on the iPhone, it very well could have Office for Mac Lite 2008 on it someday.

                  For the perspective of PalmOne Treo owners on the iPhone, here's a good overview from Treocentral. They basically say Treo still has a future, but it will probably have to cede the high-end consumer market (which they were only in briefly) and go back to targeting RIM on the business front.

                  Meanwhile, the iPhone trademark battle continues. Lots of people are pointing to other products called the iPhone. Apple's VP for global communications says, "We believe that Cisco’s U.S. trademark is tenuous at best... We are the first company to use the iPhone name for a cellphone and we’re confident we will prevail." An Apple spokeswoman says, "We think Cisco's trademark suit is silly... We believe (Cisco's) trademark registration is tenuous at best."

                  And trademark experts are coming out of the woodwork... one key piece of caselaw saying that trademarks can be deemed "abandoned" if unused for three or more years. So even if Cisco bought the company that had an iPhone product in 1997... releasing an iPhone in 2006 may have been too late to assert continuous ownership. Especially since the media had been babbling about Apple's imminent iPhone's announcement for years.

                  Finally, a few folks have made the same point I did... that even if Apple throws up its hands today and says, "Okay, it's the Apple Phone," 99.789 percent of people will still call it the iPhone. Which means Apple owns it, even if they don't. Genius!

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Apple Announcements

                    I'd think that ePhone might be better suited; e for entertainment/enjoy/experience/choke extras. Or even the ePod; consider that this is being marketed as a phone, which is sooooo smartphonish (read: last century). What the hell is it? A pod in the hand. What can it do? eVerything.**

                    A part of me is dreaming about how buff iTunes is going to become as a communications portal. Is it just about the tunes anymore? What will it be renamed as?


                    **Trademarked to Pua'i ©2007

                    pax

                    Comment


                    • Re: Apple Announcements

                      Originally posted by pzarquon View Post
                      The iPhone is pretty much a consumer device. It's a "high-end" phone, but more for the people who buy iPods and not those who buy (or rather, whose companies buy) Blackberrys.
                      Well then, I think costs will keep sales down. That and the lock to one carrier.


                      We are the first company to use the iPhone name for a cellphone and we’re confident we will prevail
                      If it was so tenuous why were they negotiating? Not unless they thought they might get it at a lowball price. Frankly I see arrogance after winning against Apple Records. They're saying in effect that a cell phone is a different market then a regular phone or a IP phone, so it can use the same name. That's how they defeated Apple Records. I doubt if the courts are going to see it that way this time around. The test is consumer confusion. Cells phones are too much like other phones. Trademarks aren't going to share.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Apple Announcements

                        Originally posted by pzarquon View Post
                        Meanwhile, the iPhone trademark battle continues. Lots of people are pointing to other products called the iPhone. Apple's VP for global communications says, "We believe that Cisco’s U.S. trademark is tenuous at best... We are the first company to use the iPhone name for a cellphone and we’re confident we will prevail." An Apple spokeswoman says, "We think Cisco's trademark suit is silly... We believe (Cisco's) trademark registration is tenuous at best."
                        I don't know about that. Even if it took them 9 years from 97 to 06 to release the Linksys iPhone family line, Cisco still did it first compared to Apple, assuming the Cisco abandoned the trademark registration argument. Plus, Cisco has had their Unifed IP Phones for years.

                        The media may have babbled about Apple's iPhone for years but the media is not Apple so up till a couple days ago, no one knew for certain what the offical product name is. So argument that media called Apple's iPhone for years gives it creditability doesn't hold much water.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Apple Announcements

                          There are other iPhones, but the other examples are better targets for a Cisco infringement lawsuit, since those are IP telephony specific, versus the Apple iPhone, which is an iPod/cellular phone hybrid. Along with the abandonment claim, Apple might argue that Cisco didn't defend its trademark against those other products, so it's moot to start crying now.

                          As for the fact that 'iPhone' was a widely covered Apple product name in the media... I wouldn't so much say it's a good legal argument, and if it goes to court, Cisco would probably win. But it's a common sense practical argument. If Apple renames it the Apple Phone today, it'll still be the iPhone to most people.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Apple Announcements

                            Originally posted by pzarquon View Post
                            There are other iPhones, but the other examples are better targets for a Cisco infringement lawsuit, since those are IP telephony specific, versus the Apple iPhone, which is an iPod/cellular phone hybrid. Along with the abandonment claim, Apple might argue that Cisco didn't defend its trademark against those other products, so it's moot to start crying now.

                            As for the fact that 'iPhone' was a widely covered Apple product name in the media... I wouldn't so much say it's a good legal argument, and if it goes to court, Cisco would probably win. But it's a common sense practical argument. If Apple renames it the Apple Phone today, it'll still be the iPhone to most people.
                            But one can also argue that Apple's iPhone can also be IP telephony since you can run wifi on it and run Skype for instance.

                            From Red Herring, it appears Apple asked for permission from Cisco in using "iPhone". If that is true, that would indicate Apple acknowledged who owned the name.

                            "Cisco entered into negotiations with Apple in good faith after Apple repeatedly asked permission to use Cisco's iPhone name," Cisco general counsel Mark Chandler said in a statement.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Apple Announcements

                              Originally posted by GeckoGeek View Post
                              What I see with the Apple iPhone is an entertainment device. How many are really going to pay that much for it when it's on their own dime? And how much is the service? I'll bet it's a lot more then just basic phone service. Even if people are willing to pony up for the device, will the pay for the expensive service too?
                              My understanding is that if you currently have basic phone service, you'll have to pay for the additional data services, just as you would now if you utilize some type of PDA. If you already have the data services, your rates wouldn't change much.

                              My impression is that the iPhone is meant to compete with the Blackberrys and Treos of the world by offering the same features, maybe more, and raising the ease of use factor. For me, the "synergy" between this product and my Mac gets me excited. One would hope that with a larger demand for the iPhone, the premium to pay for data services will go down due to the volume of customers.

                              That said, I know A LOT of people who only have a need for just A PHONE. No need for the camera, mp3 players, text messaging, just the ability to call somebody. Can't some manufacturer make something simpler?

                              Of course, I'm waiting for my iPhone........

                              Comment


                              • Re: Apple Announcements

                                so as long as your product doesn't look or function anywhere like another copyrighted product you can use the same name...right.
                                Life is what you make of it...so please read the instructions carefully.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X