Gadget freaks are still buzzing about Apple's planned iPhone, a combination smart phone and music player that won't be available until June. Meanwhile, the traditional cell phone makers are continuing to churn out music phones that can be in the hands of consumers much sooner.
The latest, and most unusual, of these music phones has just been announced by Sprint. It's a Samsung model called the UpStage. The UpStage costs just $149, less than a third of the iPhone's planned $499 price, and it will go on sale this month.
Samsung has shown real creativity in solving the problem of cramming a decent music player and phone into one small gadget. The slim UpStage has been designed with two distinct faces. On one side, it has a phone keypad and a small screen, for making voice calls and tapping out text messages. But if you turn it over, you see a larger screen and navigation controls, mainly for playing music, but also for other tasks, such as viewing online data.
At the same time, Sprint is slashing the price of songs sold on its proprietary music service from an outrageous $2.49 each to just 99 cents. That isn't quite as cheap as it seems, because you have to pay $15 a month for the privilege of buying the 99-cent songs. But it's still a positive step for consumers.
I've been testing the UpStage and found that its two-sided design works pretty well. It's a better music phone, in my opinion, than Verizon's Chocolate model, built by Samsung's Korean rival, LG.
But the UpStage has too many weaknesses and compromises for me to recommend it. It has lousy battery life, both as a phone and as a music player, a limitation Sprint and Samsung have tried to offset with a free add-on that makes the phone too bulky. And it comes with so little memory that, out of the box, it can hold only around 20 average songs. Adding more capability costs extra, thus lessening the price advantage. There are other downsides as well.
I tested the UpStage primarily as a music player, because that's its claim to fame. I compared it with the base-model iPod Nano, which also costs $149, although of course it doesn't include a phone.
I did try out the basic phone stuff, like making calls, all of which seemed OK, though the screen on the phone side of the device is very small, a sort of throwback to early cell phones. Sound quality, reception and the keypad all were fine. The built-in 1.3 megapixel camera is standard for phones these days.
Only one of the phone's two screens can be used at any one time, and you have to press a "flip" button on the side to switch. This worked well, but was kind of a pain when I was trying to use the keypad to type in text, like a Web password or the name of a new song playlist, on the music side of the phone. I had to flip to the side with the keypad and then flip back.
I loaded in about 20 songs and the UpStage played them back pretty well, displaying all the correct song information and album art. I also loaded in some photos, which also displayed fine, though the phone can handle only small picture files. I purchased a song from Sprint's music service, and that downloaded and played well.
The only problems were that the album covers and photos looked grainy, because even the larger screen has pretty low resolution. And occasionally, the start of a song was clipped. The iPod Nano exhibits neither of these problems.
Out of the box, the UpStage comes with only a tiny memory card, which can hold only about 20 standard MP3 files. The iPod Nano can hold 500 of those files. To get the same capacity on the UpStage, you have to buy a larger, $40 memory card.
Though the UpStage is bigger than the iPod Nano, it has far worse battery life - just 2.5 hours of talk time for the phone and seven hours of music playback time, compared with up to 24 hours of music playback time for the Nano. To compensate, Sprint is throwing in a "battery wallet," a case with an additional battery built in. This brings the talk time to 6.3 hours and music playback time to around 17 hours. But it makes the phone twice as thick.
There are two other problems with the UpStage. First, synchronizing its music with songs stored on a PC requires you to install and use Sprint music software. It doesn't work with Windows Media Player or the Windows version of Apple iTunes, which most music lovers already own. (You also can manually drag and drop songs onto the phone's memory card.)
Second, the navigation pad on the music side of the phone can be confusing. It works by touch controls; you have to use just the right pressure and slide your finger just the right distance along its sides to get it to work right. It's too complicated.
Samsung and Sprint deserve credit for a good try with the UpStage. But it doesn't quite cut it.
Walter Mossberg writes about personal technology for The Wall Street Journal.
IPod maker announces $1bn expansion
Foxconn, the manufacturer of Apple's iPod, will spend $1bn to set up a new factory complex in northern China, the local government in the region has announced.
The Taiwanese manufacturer's new plants will be in the same region as Intel's recently announced $2.5bn chip factory.
The factory will produce printed circuit boards and connectors for Foxconn's contract electronics manufacturing customers, according to reports in Taiwan's Economic Daily News (EDN) today.
While the company does not normally discuss details of its contract electronics manufacturing work, its customers in the past two years have included leading global brands such as Apple, Dell, Sony and HP.
Foxconn, the flagship brand name used by Taiwan's Hon Hai Precision Industry group, is also reported to be the manufacturer of Apple's iPhone, although neither company has confirmed the reports.
According to the announcement from China's Qin Huang Dao city government cited by EDN, Hon Hai chief executive Terry Guo has already signed an agreement to develop the factory site in the depressed industrial region.
At least 35,000 will be employed at the plant complex in the Qinhuangdao Economic and Technological Development Zone, although this headcount appears relatively low by the standards of Hon Hai's Chinese operations.
The initial investment of more than $1bn will be spread over three years. Construction will begin before the end of this year.
Hon Hai already has several huge plants dotted throughout eastern and southern China's high tech manufacturing areas.
Another new factory complex that has just started construction in Wuhan, central China, will employ some 200,000 when it is complete, according to the EDN.
The Taiwanese manufacturer's new plants will be in the same region as Intel's recently announced $2.5bn chip factory.
The factory will produce printed circuit boards and connectors for Foxconn's contract electronics manufacturing customers, according to reports in Taiwan's Economic Daily News (EDN) today.
While the company does not normally discuss details of its contract electronics manufacturing work, its customers in the past two years have included leading global brands such as Apple, Dell, Sony and HP.
Foxconn, the flagship brand name used by Taiwan's Hon Hai Precision Industry group, is also reported to be the manufacturer of Apple's iPhone, although neither company has confirmed the reports.
According to the announcement from China's Qin Huang Dao city government cited by EDN, Hon Hai chief executive Terry Guo has already signed an agreement to develop the factory site in the depressed industrial region.
At least 35,000 will be employed at the plant complex in the Qinhuangdao Economic and Technological Development Zone, although this headcount appears relatively low by the standards of Hon Hai's Chinese operations.
The initial investment of more than $1bn will be spread over three years. Construction will begin before the end of this year.
Hon Hai already has several huge plants dotted throughout eastern and southern China's high tech manufacturing areas.
Another new factory complex that has just started construction in Wuhan, central China, will employ some 200,000 when it is complete, according to the EDN.
Elgato's Turbo 264 speeds up QuickTime
While rumors are abound that the next version of Final Cut Studio may include a hardware option, why wait for Apple’s solution? If the name of your game is encoding for the iPod, Apple TV, iTunes, or your still-to-be iPhone, then Elgato’s Turbo 264 may be the device for you.
The small USB stick is a hardware video encoder which will speed up your video encoding and give you back your precious system resources (something Dan was detailing just the other day). It works exclusively in the H.264 format at 2-4 times the speed (depending on system configuration) in any application which uses Quicktime for export. The device is projected to ship in April for a price of 99 Euros (about US $130).
The small USB stick is a hardware video encoder which will speed up your video encoding and give you back your precious system resources (something Dan was detailing just the other day). It works exclusively in the H.264 format at 2-4 times the speed (depending on system configuration) in any application which uses Quicktime for export. The device is projected to ship in April for a price of 99 Euros (about US $130).
Windows Mobile iPhone Edition: The Movie
If just seeing wasn't believing, here's a video that shows the Windows Mobile iPhone skin in action.
Most of the icons are just shortcuts to the equivalent apps on Windows Mobile, but the most impressive thing must be the screensaver and the scrolling. The screensaver lets you whisk your finger to the right to unlock the phone, and the scrolling mimics the finger scrolling on the iPhone. A nice stopover between now and June for those who really can't wait. – Jason Chen
Most of the icons are just shortcuts to the equivalent apps on Windows Mobile, but the most impressive thing must be the screensaver and the scrolling. The screensaver lets you whisk your finger to the right to unlock the phone, and the scrolling mimics the finger scrolling on the iPhone. A nice stopover between now and June for those who really can't wait. – Jason Chen
First Apple iPhone ad spotted at the Oscars
During the 79th Annual Academy Awards, Apple managed to slip in a very nicely done iPhone ad. The 30-second spot includes clips from different TV shows and movies with about 30 actors (not sure about that) saying "hello" on the phone. It ends with an image of the iPhone and the words "Coming in June".
Apple paid about $1.7 million for an ad that was supposedly viewed by over 40 million people in the US and probably more across the globe. The ad showed up on the Apple website shortly after it was aired.
Oh and another insignificant thing you probably might have missed: at the end of the ad the logo on the top left side of the iPhone screen has been updated and says at&t instead of Cingular. Enough jabbering, the ad is below if you wish to see it. Higher quality videos are available on Apple's site.
Apple paid about $1.7 million for an ad that was supposedly viewed by over 40 million people in the US and probably more across the globe. The ad showed up on the Apple website shortly after it was aired.
Oh and another insignificant thing you probably might have missed: at the end of the ad the logo on the top left side of the iPhone screen has been updated and says at&t instead of Cingular. Enough jabbering, the ad is below if you wish to see it. Higher quality videos are available on Apple's site.
Blackberry Has Momentum to Handle iPhone Competition
By: pdaBlast! Staff
RBC Capital Markets analyst Mike Abramsky believes that the RIM Blackberry has built enough momentum to hold its own against competition from the Apple iPhone. He believes it so much, he raised his rating from "sector perform" to "outperform" and sent the stock price running.
According to Forbes Abramsky said, "While we continue to expect competitive launches, particularly Apple's iPhone, to pressure RIM's valuation, RIM's stronger than expected momentum may help mitigate this impact, reassuring investors its threat to RIM's consumer push may be less than feared."
There was a lot of hype when Apple announced its iPhone offering. After all, it is a very slick looking device. As time has passed though, the people at RIM are seemingly more confident. In a recent interview with Laptop Magazine, co-CEO Mike Lazaridis said about upcoming iPhone, "...the touchscreen is not new. In fact, touchscreens didn't catch on the way people expected. People are very tactile. BlackBerrys are very tactile. We spent a lot of time on this keyboard because it's really hard to have both form and function excel at the same time. With the 8800, it's almost like a soft touch. It's easier to type on than any BlackBerry in the past."
Can the Blackberry handle the competition posed by Apple's iPhone? Stay tuned.
iPhone: Revolutionary or just fashionably late?
Associated Press
February 5, 2007
SAN JOSE, CALIF. - Pablo Gonzalez, a Prada shoe-wearing cell phone connoisseur who jumps from one new handset to the next, is ready to ditch his $1,000 touch-screen cell phone for Apple’s iPhone when it becomes available in June.
Related Links
Business
Computers & Technology
Tark Abed, on the other hand, just got the new Samsung BlackJack smart phone a month ago. The industrial designer at Palo Alto-based Speck Design isn’t keen on spending $500 even though he finds the iPhone’s sleek interface alluring and innovative.
“I upgraded to an unlimited data plan and got the BlackJack for $149,” he said, “and that’s a lot of phone already for $149.”
Their divergent views underscore why Apple’s much-hyped seminal cell phone is all the rage and why, at the same time, incumbent rivals are stirred but say they are not shaken.
The iPhone got everybody — from techie bloggers to late-night TV hosts — talking when it arrived fashionably late on the wireless communications scene. Would-be rivals are welcoming the challenge but questioning Apple’s claim that the iPhone is “revolutionary.”
Apple’s competitors predict that even as the gadget will likely boost the company’s fortunes, it will have limited market share and fall short of the successes Apple has seen with its iPod portable music player. They contend some of the phone’s muchtouted features — such as its touch screen, movement sensors and music player — are not innovative or new.
“They’re just jumping into the party where everyone else is,” said Peter Skarzynski, a senior vice president at Samsung Electronics Co.’s telecommunications unit in North America.
Apple is getting in at a time when competition in the cell phone business is, as ThinkEquity Partners analyst Jonathan Hoopes puts it, “as hot as Hades.”
Because nearly everyone already has a wireless device of some sort, the success of the iPhone will depend on whether Apple’s notoriously slick marketing machine can persuade consumers to replace their current phones with an iPhone that costs $500 or more. In some cases they’ll have to switch carriers as Apple’s gadgets will work only through Cingular Wireless.
“This is not just as easy as going out to buy an iPod,” Hoopes said.
The cell phone market is crowded, yet still growing, and its biggest players are looking for ways to squeeze more profits from declining prices and ever-fickle consumer tastes.
One of the brightest growth spots for the industry has been in cell phones that function as do-it-all devices capable of not only voice communications, but also data, such as Web-browsing and e-mail.
It is precisely this category called smart phones that Apple is targeting with the iPhone, which triples as a phone, a music player and a mobile Internet device.
Sales of smart phones in North America are estimated to grow from 11 million units in 2007 to 55 million in 2010, according to market research firm Gartner.
Worldwide unit sales are projected to nearly quadruple, from 122 million in 2007 to 450 million in 2010.
Nokia Corp. Chief Executive Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo told analysts last week that he doesn’t think Nokia, the world’s No. 1 handset maker, needs to change its business approach because of the iPhone.
But Apple’s entry “will stimulate this market, it’s very clear,” he said. “The fact that we will see multipurpose devices from many manufacturers, I think it will be good for the industry. And in that way, I very much welcome (Apple to the market).”
Handset makers, which already face cutthroat design and pricing battles among themselves, will be watching as well. Samsung, the thirdlargest cell phone maker, is paying particular attention to effects on its line of mid- to high-end phones.
“It’ll definitely impact us, but how much, it’ll depend,” said Dong Jin Oh, president and CEO of the American unit of Samsung.
Samsung and its rivals were just as curious as everyone else Jan. 9 when Apple, after more than two years of rumors and development, finally delivered on the hype.
Nokia employees watched online demonstrations of the iPhone from their trade show booth at the International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas.
Padmasree Warrior, chief technology officer for No. 2 handset maker Motorola, posted a “morning after” blog saying she’d always been a fan of Apple’s creativity.
She called the iPhone a “compelling concept,” but she also outlined its potential shortcomings.
With the iPhone still months away, no one knows all its features or how well it functions in real life.
Any criticisms leveled now — the high price, the exclusive distribution through Cingular Wireless, the choice to use the slower 2.5G data network, the apparent lack of support for Microsoft Corp.’s business e-mail programs, the lack of a traditional QWERTY button keyboard — could become moot or insignificant later.
February 5, 2007
SAN JOSE, CALIF. - Pablo Gonzalez, a Prada shoe-wearing cell phone connoisseur who jumps from one new handset to the next, is ready to ditch his $1,000 touch-screen cell phone for Apple’s iPhone when it becomes available in June.
Related Links
Business
Computers & Technology
Tark Abed, on the other hand, just got the new Samsung BlackJack smart phone a month ago. The industrial designer at Palo Alto-based Speck Design isn’t keen on spending $500 even though he finds the iPhone’s sleek interface alluring and innovative.
“I upgraded to an unlimited data plan and got the BlackJack for $149,” he said, “and that’s a lot of phone already for $149.”
Their divergent views underscore why Apple’s much-hyped seminal cell phone is all the rage and why, at the same time, incumbent rivals are stirred but say they are not shaken.
The iPhone got everybody — from techie bloggers to late-night TV hosts — talking when it arrived fashionably late on the wireless communications scene. Would-be rivals are welcoming the challenge but questioning Apple’s claim that the iPhone is “revolutionary.”
Apple’s competitors predict that even as the gadget will likely boost the company’s fortunes, it will have limited market share and fall short of the successes Apple has seen with its iPod portable music player. They contend some of the phone’s muchtouted features — such as its touch screen, movement sensors and music player — are not innovative or new.
“They’re just jumping into the party where everyone else is,” said Peter Skarzynski, a senior vice president at Samsung Electronics Co.’s telecommunications unit in North America.
Apple is getting in at a time when competition in the cell phone business is, as ThinkEquity Partners analyst Jonathan Hoopes puts it, “as hot as Hades.”
Because nearly everyone already has a wireless device of some sort, the success of the iPhone will depend on whether Apple’s notoriously slick marketing machine can persuade consumers to replace their current phones with an iPhone that costs $500 or more. In some cases they’ll have to switch carriers as Apple’s gadgets will work only through Cingular Wireless.
“This is not just as easy as going out to buy an iPod,” Hoopes said.
The cell phone market is crowded, yet still growing, and its biggest players are looking for ways to squeeze more profits from declining prices and ever-fickle consumer tastes.
One of the brightest growth spots for the industry has been in cell phones that function as do-it-all devices capable of not only voice communications, but also data, such as Web-browsing and e-mail.
It is precisely this category called smart phones that Apple is targeting with the iPhone, which triples as a phone, a music player and a mobile Internet device.
Sales of smart phones in North America are estimated to grow from 11 million units in 2007 to 55 million in 2010, according to market research firm Gartner.
Worldwide unit sales are projected to nearly quadruple, from 122 million in 2007 to 450 million in 2010.
Nokia Corp. Chief Executive Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo told analysts last week that he doesn’t think Nokia, the world’s No. 1 handset maker, needs to change its business approach because of the iPhone.
But Apple’s entry “will stimulate this market, it’s very clear,” he said. “The fact that we will see multipurpose devices from many manufacturers, I think it will be good for the industry. And in that way, I very much welcome (Apple to the market).”
Handset makers, which already face cutthroat design and pricing battles among themselves, will be watching as well. Samsung, the thirdlargest cell phone maker, is paying particular attention to effects on its line of mid- to high-end phones.
“It’ll definitely impact us, but how much, it’ll depend,” said Dong Jin Oh, president and CEO of the American unit of Samsung.
Samsung and its rivals were just as curious as everyone else Jan. 9 when Apple, after more than two years of rumors and development, finally delivered on the hype.
Nokia employees watched online demonstrations of the iPhone from their trade show booth at the International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas.
Padmasree Warrior, chief technology officer for No. 2 handset maker Motorola, posted a “morning after” blog saying she’d always been a fan of Apple’s creativity.
She called the iPhone a “compelling concept,” but she also outlined its potential shortcomings.
With the iPhone still months away, no one knows all its features or how well it functions in real life.
Any criticisms leveled now — the high price, the exclusive distribution through Cingular Wireless, the choice to use the slower 2.5G data network, the apparent lack of support for Microsoft Corp.’s business e-mail programs, the lack of a traditional QWERTY button keyboard — could become moot or insignificant later.
Cisco Gives Apple More Time in iPhone Suit
Cisco has decided to give Apple more time regarding the iPhone suit. The company has given Apple until February 15 to respond to a lawsuit filed by Cisco regarding the usage of Cisco’s trademark name for the iPhone product. Cisco had allegedly beat Apple to the iPhone name. Turns out Cisco's had the name since 2000, when it bought InfoGear Technology, which had the rights to the iPhone name.
The companies hope to reach an agreement on both trademark rights and interoperability, the companies said in a joint statement.
However, in November 2006, analysts had noted that an iPhone could cannibalise iPod sales. But the move can’t be resisted. Music is increasingly moving onto cell phones, they added. "I think over the long term mobile music is gong to be huge," Pacific Growth Equities analyst Derrick Wood said. "And that is playing and consuming music over your phone."
In all probability, the iPhone will include music-playing option, a common feature in most phones sold today. Makers of smart phones that sport Microsoft Windows Mobile 5 are turning Windows Media into one option to turn a PDA-style phone into a music player. Meanwhile, Motorola is aligned with Apple for iTunes on cell phones. Microsoft and Nokia, among others, are eyeing new handsets.
Apple’s devices are sold at a premium because of its attention to details.
The companies hope to reach an agreement on both trademark rights and interoperability, the companies said in a joint statement.
However, in November 2006, analysts had noted that an iPhone could cannibalise iPod sales. But the move can’t be resisted. Music is increasingly moving onto cell phones, they added. "I think over the long term mobile music is gong to be huge," Pacific Growth Equities analyst Derrick Wood said. "And that is playing and consuming music over your phone."
In all probability, the iPhone will include music-playing option, a common feature in most phones sold today. Makers of smart phones that sport Microsoft Windows Mobile 5 are turning Windows Media into one option to turn a PDA-style phone into a music player. Meanwhile, Motorola is aligned with Apple for iTunes on cell phones. Microsoft and Nokia, among others, are eyeing new handsets.
Apple’s devices are sold at a premium because of its attention to details.
BenQ To Take On Apple iPhone
David Richards - Monday, 5 February 2007
BenQ is Not For Sale at any price. Howeverthey do have an arsenal of new products to launch including a tough new competitor to the iPhone.
Advertisement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BenQ is not for sale according to the Companies CEO K.Y. Lee. Facing year end losses of nearly a Billion Australian dollars the company believes that they have enough in reserves to fend off any hostile takeover. They also claim to have several new breakthrough products that will allow them to claw back revenues among them are an iPhone competitor and new 1080p LCD TV's.
The Company also claims that Acer are not a contender to buy the BenQ brand as reported on SmartHouse News earlier this week despite "Wishful thinking" on the part of some Acer executives.
According to BenQ regional Vice President Phil Newton BenQ is set to launch several new products and could well be one of the first LCD TV manufacturer to deliver a new generation of 120Hz LCD TV's. He also claims that they have an iPhone killer that will compete head on with Apple.
Said Newton "I have spoken to KY Lee and BenQ is not for sale at any time or to anyone. What we are doing is re focusing the Company on a host of new products including a new touchphone mobile phone. we are well aware of the rumours and claims that Acer want the BenQ name. This is not on and is wishful thinking on the part of some Acer executives"
"I anticipate that BenQ could well reach a billion Australian in losses however the Company is very stable and will grow over the next year by delivering a host of innovative new products. We have new phones, TV's and projectors" he said.
He added" "Apple are not the only ones to have been working on touchscreen technology in phones. BenQ has it's own patents and has been working on this technology for a while. We will be launching our new touchscreen phone soon. We are also set to launch a stunning range of 1080p LCD TV's with duel tuners and built in PVR's
BenQ's losses for the fourth quarter of 2006 could be higher than expected due to the appropriation of US$61.5 million) for two-year after-sale services committed to handsets sold by BenQ Mobile, according to Eric Yu, senior vice president for finance at BenQ.
Currently rumours are circulating that BenQ is close to being sold
While BenQ has not yet made public its financial reports for the fourth quarter 2006, analysts at Taiwan securities houses have estimated that the company may book a non-operating loss of between US$182 and US$243 million.
With a higher-than-expected amount of non-operating losses, BenQ will continue operating in the red after taxes in the fourth quarter, after posting a net loss of NT$19.72 billion in the first three quarters of 2006, the analysts indicated.
For all of 2006, BenQ's net losses could top as much as US$800 million the analysts added.
In related news, BenQ has officially separated its corporate structure into three business groups – the integrated manufacturing services business group (IMS), the digital media business group (DMG) and the mobile communication business group (MCG), with the IMS group likely to be spun off to form a subsidiary, Yu said.
The IMS may bring in other strategic partners in the second half of 2007 at the earliest, according to BenQ chairman, KY Lee.
Meanwhile, BenQ plans to launch 14 new handsets in 2007, with 3G models to account for 40% of the planned new handsets, sources at BenQ have revealed.
BenQ is Not For Sale at any price. Howeverthey do have an arsenal of new products to launch including a tough new competitor to the iPhone.
Advertisement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BenQ is not for sale according to the Companies CEO K.Y. Lee. Facing year end losses of nearly a Billion Australian dollars the company believes that they have enough in reserves to fend off any hostile takeover. They also claim to have several new breakthrough products that will allow them to claw back revenues among them are an iPhone competitor and new 1080p LCD TV's.
The Company also claims that Acer are not a contender to buy the BenQ brand as reported on SmartHouse News earlier this week despite "Wishful thinking" on the part of some Acer executives.
According to BenQ regional Vice President Phil Newton BenQ is set to launch several new products and could well be one of the first LCD TV manufacturer to deliver a new generation of 120Hz LCD TV's. He also claims that they have an iPhone killer that will compete head on with Apple.
Said Newton "I have spoken to KY Lee and BenQ is not for sale at any time or to anyone. What we are doing is re focusing the Company on a host of new products including a new touchphone mobile phone. we are well aware of the rumours and claims that Acer want the BenQ name. This is not on and is wishful thinking on the part of some Acer executives"
"I anticipate that BenQ could well reach a billion Australian in losses however the Company is very stable and will grow over the next year by delivering a host of innovative new products. We have new phones, TV's and projectors" he said.
He added" "Apple are not the only ones to have been working on touchscreen technology in phones. BenQ has it's own patents and has been working on this technology for a while. We will be launching our new touchscreen phone soon. We are also set to launch a stunning range of 1080p LCD TV's with duel tuners and built in PVR's
BenQ's losses for the fourth quarter of 2006 could be higher than expected due to the appropriation of US$61.5 million) for two-year after-sale services committed to handsets sold by BenQ Mobile, according to Eric Yu, senior vice president for finance at BenQ.
Currently rumours are circulating that BenQ is close to being sold
While BenQ has not yet made public its financial reports for the fourth quarter 2006, analysts at Taiwan securities houses have estimated that the company may book a non-operating loss of between US$182 and US$243 million.
With a higher-than-expected amount of non-operating losses, BenQ will continue operating in the red after taxes in the fourth quarter, after posting a net loss of NT$19.72 billion in the first three quarters of 2006, the analysts indicated.
For all of 2006, BenQ's net losses could top as much as US$800 million the analysts added.
In related news, BenQ has officially separated its corporate structure into three business groups – the integrated manufacturing services business group (IMS), the digital media business group (DMG) and the mobile communication business group (MCG), with the IMS group likely to be spun off to form a subsidiary, Yu said.
The IMS may bring in other strategic partners in the second half of 2007 at the earliest, according to BenQ chairman, KY Lee.
Meanwhile, BenQ plans to launch 14 new handsets in 2007, with 3G models to account for 40% of the planned new handsets, sources at BenQ have revealed.
iPhone inspires next generation iPod
BY ERIC BENDEROFF
Chicago Tribune
If you want to know what the next iPod will look like, go to Apple.com and watch the demo for the coming iPhone.
Since Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone, which goes on sale in June from Cingular Wireless, much has been said and written about how revolutionary it will be. That's all well and good, but one aspect has been overlooked: How will this impact the iPod?
The answer is, quite a bit. Already, Apple executives are calling the iPhone the best iPod the company has built. Do you think all that really cool technology, particularly the touch screen, only will be used on a phone that starts at $500?
Hardly. Put me on the record as saying you'll see a touch-screen iPod this fall, a few months after the buzz of the iPhone launch settles and a few months before the key holiday sales season kicks in.
Apple does not talk about new products before they are introduced, and it is no different when people at the company are asked what a new iPod could look like. But Apple cares about being an innovator, as well as protecting its bread-and-butter product line, so it would behoove Jobs to include iPhone's nifty new features in his top-of-the-line video-playing iPod.
What's at stake for Apple? Just continued market dominance.
The iPod is overdue for a change. By fall, it will be two years since Apple introduced the so-called fifth-generation iPod. That's the one that plays videos and was slightly upgraded last year with more storage and a marginally bigger screen. Call it the fifth-generation "A" version, if you like.
But the sixth generation is coming, and it will make millions of people feel better about not shelling out $500 for an iPhone. That iPhone will have 4 gigabytes of storage, while a $600 version will have 8 gb.
By comparison, a new iPod will have at least 80 gb of music, video and photo storage capability, like the current top model, and be priced at about $350. Historically, Apple has kept the price of its top product in that range, even as it provides more capabilities. The new iPod should be no different.
"I think it will be a more compelling product than the iPhone," said Rob Enderle, a technology analyst who agrees the next iPod is on the way. "There are a lot of things where a touch screen on a phone doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense, but on an iPod it could be absolutely stunning."
The touch-screen controls have wowed people who have seen demonstrations of the iPhone. Instead of using a scroll wheel to navigate through your songs, videos and photos, you just touch the screen. Use your finger for scrolling, then tap on the artist you want to hear. A list of songs and albums pop up.
Choose a song, and while it plays, the album art shows, just like on the fifth-generation iPods. But the iPhone takes it up a notch: Turned horizontally, that album art becomes part of "cover flow," where you can scroll through all the album art stored on your device.
Cover flow is borrowed from the recent iTunes software upgrade. It makes the music experience more visual, as if you are sifting through a collection of albums in a box. It is a far more interesting feature on a hand-held device than on a computer.
What else will be on the new iPod?
Another nice addition would be Bluetooth connectivity, so you can use wireless headphones with your iPod. That will be included in the iPhone for hands-free driving and listening to music.
With Bluetooth on an iPod, tech writers like this one will have to stop using phrases like "those ubiquitous white cords dangling from everyone's ears." Rather, we'll have to talk about how you can spot the cool kids with the new iPods because there are no more dangling cords.
Keep in mind that while Apple is preparing to dip its toe into the phone business, it already is shoulder deep in the music business. By the time 2007 ends, you can bet Apple will sell more new iPods than iPhones.
Chicago Tribune
If you want to know what the next iPod will look like, go to Apple.com and watch the demo for the coming iPhone.
Since Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone, which goes on sale in June from Cingular Wireless, much has been said and written about how revolutionary it will be. That's all well and good, but one aspect has been overlooked: How will this impact the iPod?
The answer is, quite a bit. Already, Apple executives are calling the iPhone the best iPod the company has built. Do you think all that really cool technology, particularly the touch screen, only will be used on a phone that starts at $500?
Hardly. Put me on the record as saying you'll see a touch-screen iPod this fall, a few months after the buzz of the iPhone launch settles and a few months before the key holiday sales season kicks in.
Apple does not talk about new products before they are introduced, and it is no different when people at the company are asked what a new iPod could look like. But Apple cares about being an innovator, as well as protecting its bread-and-butter product line, so it would behoove Jobs to include iPhone's nifty new features in his top-of-the-line video-playing iPod.
What's at stake for Apple? Just continued market dominance.
The iPod is overdue for a change. By fall, it will be two years since Apple introduced the so-called fifth-generation iPod. That's the one that plays videos and was slightly upgraded last year with more storage and a marginally bigger screen. Call it the fifth-generation "A" version, if you like.
But the sixth generation is coming, and it will make millions of people feel better about not shelling out $500 for an iPhone. That iPhone will have 4 gigabytes of storage, while a $600 version will have 8 gb.
By comparison, a new iPod will have at least 80 gb of music, video and photo storage capability, like the current top model, and be priced at about $350. Historically, Apple has kept the price of its top product in that range, even as it provides more capabilities. The new iPod should be no different.
"I think it will be a more compelling product than the iPhone," said Rob Enderle, a technology analyst who agrees the next iPod is on the way. "There are a lot of things where a touch screen on a phone doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense, but on an iPod it could be absolutely stunning."
The touch-screen controls have wowed people who have seen demonstrations of the iPhone. Instead of using a scroll wheel to navigate through your songs, videos and photos, you just touch the screen. Use your finger for scrolling, then tap on the artist you want to hear. A list of songs and albums pop up.
Choose a song, and while it plays, the album art shows, just like on the fifth-generation iPods. But the iPhone takes it up a notch: Turned horizontally, that album art becomes part of "cover flow," where you can scroll through all the album art stored on your device.
Cover flow is borrowed from the recent iTunes software upgrade. It makes the music experience more visual, as if you are sifting through a collection of albums in a box. It is a far more interesting feature on a hand-held device than on a computer.
What else will be on the new iPod?
Another nice addition would be Bluetooth connectivity, so you can use wireless headphones with your iPod. That will be included in the iPhone for hands-free driving and listening to music.
With Bluetooth on an iPod, tech writers like this one will have to stop using phrases like "those ubiquitous white cords dangling from everyone's ears." Rather, we'll have to talk about how you can spot the cool kids with the new iPods because there are no more dangling cords.
Keep in mind that while Apple is preparing to dip its toe into the phone business, it already is shoulder deep in the music business. By the time 2007 ends, you can bet Apple will sell more new iPods than iPhones.
An iPhone By Any Other Name? Surely Not
Thursday's New York Times Business section included a full-page ad for the iPhone -- but not the iPhone you're thinking of. This page showed three Cisco/Linksys VoIP phones, and it looked suspiciously like Cisco marking its territory in the battle with Apple for the right to use the name "iPhone."
Make no mistake about it, the iPhone is made by Cisco/Linksys -- at least according to this ad in the New York Times for February 2, 2007.
Click to Enlarge
The ad ran the day after the two companies announced they had gone back to the bargaining table to settle their dispute over the name.
The two companies have known they had a problem for years -- Cisco has used the "iPhone" name since it acquired a company called Infogear in 2000, and Cisco filed a lawsuit the day after Apple unveiled its iPhone at MacWorld.
(If you haven't watched introduction video that's posted at Apple's Web site you should. Not only does the iPhone look like a real winner, but Steve Jobs' enthusiastic and skillful presentation makes it an enjoyable hour-plus.)
While Cisco thinks it's got a trademark, the press and pundits have been speculating for years that Apple's success with the iPod would lead to an "iPhone" product from the company, so the name has been in use to describe something not sold by Cisco.
It's an interesting legal point, because trademark protection doesn't work like patents. There is, for example, something like a "reasonable man" test for trademarks: if a name is in common usage, it can't be trademarked, and trademarks can be lost because the name they protect has passed into the vernacular: If you say, "I need a kleenex" instead of "I need a Kleenex brand tissue" you've hit the issue squarely on the head. (I don't know whether Kleenex is still a trademark or not. Kimberly-Clark legal beagles, spare me your nastygrams.)
Generally trademark suits revolve around whether confusion over the name has done irreparable harm to the business or reputation of the aggrieved party. You'd think that would be Cisco in this case, but perhaps not.
Consider that reasonable man test. If you went up to 10 people on the street and asked them, "Who makes the iPhone?" I'll bet you 10 out of 10 would say without a moment's hesitation, "Apple."
Apple has built a great deal of brand value for "i-anything" with the iPod, and it could make a powerful argument in court that Cisco's use of "iPhone" was an attempt to create confusion in the marketplace and damage its business. Cisco has filed a
Apple and its Cease and Desist team at O'Melveney & Myers LLP have a long history of going after every little fanboy Web site that uses "i" or "Pod" (or now, "phone"), and even though the company has taken a lot of PR grief for it, there's a good reason. Trademarks must be actively defended against misuse, or they can be lost. That was why, for example, the Prema Toy Company was put in the awkward position of legally bullying a 12-year-old boy who used his nickname on a personal Web site, pokey.org, while Prema owned the trademarks on claymation icons Gumby and his horse Pokey.
But just defending it doesn't secure it. That may be the reason why Cisco has put its court case on hold and gone back to the table with Apple. Even ads in the New York Times, after all, are only worth the paper they're printed on.
My prediction: Apple will get "iPhone" without too much muss or fuss, and Cisco will get a face-saving concession, something it will claim it wanted all along, like the right to make Linksys WiFi routers that work in some theoretically special way with iPhones.
Cisco doesn't have anything to gain by standing in Apple's way, and it could have quite a bit to lose. Cisco's Linksys VoIP phones are going to sell by the thousands, whether they're called "iPhones" or not. Apple's multifunction phones are going to sell by the gazillions, whether they're called "iPhones" or not. If Cisco can actually hitch Linksys equipment to the Apple juggernaut, even a "Works with iPhone" sticker on the box will be worth more to Cisco's bottom line than denying Apple the "iPhone" trademark.
Apple, Cisco Extend Negotiations on iPhone Trademark
The battle commanders over the iPhone trademark on Thursday agreed to a temporary truce in hopes to reach an agreement before taking things to the courts.
In a joint statement from Apple and Cisco regarding iPhone trademark, the companies have announced that they “have agreed to extend the time for Apple to respond to the lawsuit to allow for discussions with the aim of reaching agreement on trademark rights and interoperability.”
While the iPhone name may already be associated with Apple and the rest of its iLife products, Cisco has owned the iPhone trademark since 2000. In fact, Cisco in December 2006 launched its own line of telephony devices carrying the iPhone brand. Apple then bravely announced its wireless product carrying the same name in January.
Cisco took immediate exception to Apple’s use of its trademark and sued for infringement. “Cisco entered into negotiations with Apple in good faith after Apple repeatedly asked permission to use Cisco's iPhone name,” said Mark Chandler, senior vice president and general counsel for Cisco. “There is no doubt that Apple's new phone is very exciting, but they should not be using our trademark without our permission.”
“Today's iPhone is not tomorrow's iPhone. The potential for convergence of the home phone, cell phone, work phone and PC is limitless, which is why it is so important for us to protect our brand,” said Chandler.
Oddly enough, Apple responded to Cisco’s lawsuit by calling it silly. “We think Cisco's trademark lawsuit is silly. There are already several companies using the name iPhone for VOIP products, and we believe that Cisco's US trademark registration is tenuous at best,” said Apple spokesperson Alan Hely.
“We are the first company ever to use the iPhone name for a cell phone, and if Cisco wants to challenge us on it we are very confident we will prevail.”
With the entertaining sound bites out of the way, the two companies will now have another two weeks to sort things out. If the decision ends up in the hands of the court, some believe that Apple and Cisco could both end up using the iPhone name on the basis of its increasing iGeneric nature.
In a joint statement from Apple and Cisco regarding iPhone trademark, the companies have announced that they “have agreed to extend the time for Apple to respond to the lawsuit to allow for discussions with the aim of reaching agreement on trademark rights and interoperability.”
While the iPhone name may already be associated with Apple and the rest of its iLife products, Cisco has owned the iPhone trademark since 2000. In fact, Cisco in December 2006 launched its own line of telephony devices carrying the iPhone brand. Apple then bravely announced its wireless product carrying the same name in January.
Cisco took immediate exception to Apple’s use of its trademark and sued for infringement. “Cisco entered into negotiations with Apple in good faith after Apple repeatedly asked permission to use Cisco's iPhone name,” said Mark Chandler, senior vice president and general counsel for Cisco. “There is no doubt that Apple's new phone is very exciting, but they should not be using our trademark without our permission.”
“Today's iPhone is not tomorrow's iPhone. The potential for convergence of the home phone, cell phone, work phone and PC is limitless, which is why it is so important for us to protect our brand,” said Chandler.
Oddly enough, Apple responded to Cisco’s lawsuit by calling it silly. “We think Cisco's trademark lawsuit is silly. There are already several companies using the name iPhone for VOIP products, and we believe that Cisco's US trademark registration is tenuous at best,” said Apple spokesperson Alan Hely.
“We are the first company ever to use the iPhone name for a cell phone, and if Cisco wants to challenge us on it we are very confident we will prevail.”
With the entertaining sound bites out of the way, the two companies will now have another two weeks to sort things out. If the decision ends up in the hands of the court, some believe that Apple and Cisco could both end up using the iPhone name on the basis of its increasing iGeneric nature.
Apple gets more time to respond in Cisco iPhone lawsuit
Apple last month showcased their Apple iPhone mobile phone product. The company assured the media and fans that they would indeed launch this phone with the name iPhone as speculated by the media.
However, the iPhone name is a trademark owned by Cisco and they sued Apple after the launch was made public. The two companies had been talking about sharing this name usage before the launch. Apparently, Apple declined to meet the Cisco’s demand for usage of the term iPhone.
The two companies have now agreed to extend the time for Apple to respond to a lawsuit over the iPhone trademark.
They aim to use this extended time for discussions related to reaching agreement on trademark rights and interoperability.
Cisco had asked the court to force Apple to use some other name for their mobile phone product. Apple responded by saying that they are the first company to use iPhone name for a mobile phone product and they should be allowed the use the name.
However, the iPhone name is a trademark owned by Cisco and they sued Apple after the launch was made public. The two companies had been talking about sharing this name usage before the launch. Apparently, Apple declined to meet the Cisco’s demand for usage of the term iPhone.
The two companies have now agreed to extend the time for Apple to respond to a lawsuit over the iPhone trademark.
They aim to use this extended time for discussions related to reaching agreement on trademark rights and interoperability.
Cisco had asked the court to force Apple to use some other name for their mobile phone product. Apple responded by saying that they are the first company to use iPhone name for a mobile phone product and they should be allowed the use the name.
Apple, Cisco Talking Again to Settle 'iPhone' Dispute
Apple and Cisco have agreed to allow more time for Apple to respond to Cisco's claims in the legal dispute over the "iPhone" name, with the aim of reaching agreement on trademark rights and interoperability, reports E-Commerce News.
Cisco has owned the rights to the name since 1995 and lauched a line of VoIP phone products last year under its Linksys brand. Apple says it is confident it can use the name since its iPhone will operate on cellular networks, not in-home WiFi. However, Cisco said either phone could evolve to become more of a direct competitor.
Both companies have been tight-lipped about the proceedings, but apparently the battle over the name has been raging as long as five years.
Apple is likely worried that Cisco can hold out for licensing fees or royalties - that's a problem, since mobile phones are not a high-margin business. And a trial would likely cost both companies a lot of money. A settlement outside of court would therefore make sense.
Cisco has owned the rights to the name since 1995 and lauched a line of VoIP phone products last year under its Linksys brand. Apple says it is confident it can use the name since its iPhone will operate on cellular networks, not in-home WiFi. However, Cisco said either phone could evolve to become more of a direct competitor.
Both companies have been tight-lipped about the proceedings, but apparently the battle over the name has been raging as long as five years.
Apple is likely worried that Cisco can hold out for licensing fees or royalties - that's a problem, since mobile phones are not a high-margin business. And a trial would likely cost both companies a lot of money. A settlement outside of court would therefore make sense.
Andover Eyes the iPhone
Every time Steve Jobs, Apple Corporation’s CEO, announces Apple’s newest innovation, the media, Wall Street, and Andover students immediately take notice. After his epic announcements, the frenzy to purchase the latest Apple products begins.
On January 11, Apple released the multi-functional iPhone prototype to the public. The iPhone combines all the joys of modern technology – an iPod, a digital camera, Internet access, and a cellular phone – into one sleek and easy to use device. To many, the iPhone is the zenith of all things snazzy.
However, excited consumers must realize that Apple only released the iPhone prototype, which cannot be purchased until June. Also, one bottom line question still remains: Will Andover students purchase the product?
Most see the plethora of functions on the iPhone as a chance to replace other products. Nicole Duddy ’08 said, “When I go out, I always have my cell phone, iPod, and camera in my pockets. Sometimes, I even carry around my laptop for convenience. I want the iPhone because that means I only need to carry around on thing!”
Before the iPhone, companies tried to down size products. Devices became thinner and more compact, such as the credit card-size Canon Powershot, Motorola’s RAZR phone, and Apple’s iPod Nano. But with the iPhone, Apple introduces a new trend to compact everything together.
However, other students seem skeptical about the product. Daniah Missmar ’09 said, “I want to wait a couple more years until Apple has completely perfected the product. This product is so new and so innovative, I’m afraid there will be too many problems with it.”
Furthermore, Andover students see Apple’s contract with the phone company Cingular as both a hindrance and a benefit. Cingular’s exclusivity could be a real problem. First, the company will have a monopoly on the phone service for iPhone consumers. Second, residents in Vermont and Nevada are excluded from the iPhone frenzy due to Cingular’s gaps in wireless service.
But this business deal was exactly what the two companies had intended. James Rockas ’08 said, “Even though I have Verizon and I get better service on campus, I will give that up to get the iPhone and switch over to Cingular.”
Joseph Mensah ’08 is embracing the fact that Apple has collaborated with Cingular. “I have built up credit with Cingular, so as soon as the iPhone is released, I can use the credit and upgrade my phone. The deal is too sweet to pass up.”
The iPhone’s price tag, currently at $499 for a four-gigabyte model and $100 more for the eight-gigabyte model, has some PA students cringing.
Brianna McCarthy ’09 said, “The iPhone seems really cool but what if I lose it? It’s too expensive to take that risk.” Other students agree. They fear that in one fell swoop everything – music, videos, phone, Internet, and photos – can be lost.”
Perhaps for some, the price is more acceptable when they consider all the features and bragging rights that come when you are one of the first to own an iPhone.
Even with debates of whether or not the convenience and reliability of the iPhone is worth the price, one thing is for sure – the iPhone lives up to its hype.
The device is 0.46 inches thinner than many popular competitors, including the Blackberry Pearl and Palm Treo. There will inevitably be comparisons between the iPhone and many other smartphones like Motorola’s Q, but the completely flat 3.5-inch screen stands out from the others.
Also, upon first sight, many people confusedly ask, “But what about all of the keys and buttons?” This is another aspect to the iPhone’s genius. If the phone function is in use, a touch sensitive number pad appears on screen. Searching on the Internet? A full QWERTY keyboard appears that is so intuitive that it senses any range of mistakes and automatically corrects itself.
Furthermore, the iPod feature on the device can be used for sixteen hours of audio playback and five hours of video watching. However, unlike the swirling finger motions to control the iPod, all one has to do to scroll through playlists is sweep one finger up or down. With up to eight gigabytes of storage, it has roughly the same amount of memory as the highest volume iPod Nano. For watching TV shows or movies from the iTunes store, the device can be laid on its side, whereupon the iPhone will sense the switch in orientation and transform into widescreen mode.
A similar aspect can be used on the photo feature of the iPhone. The innovators at Mac even flawlessly integrated a two megapixel camera into the phone. Many iPod users will really appreciate this new feature, especially since iPods can only store and display photos.
Finally, the breakthrough feature of this gadget is the highly advanced Internet feature. Access to the Web is gained through WiFi, the common wireless medium, or Cingular’s EDGE system. Unlike viewing microscopic and condensed versions of a website on current cell phones, the iPhone allows one to view the exact same thing as one would on a computer monitor with just as much clarity. Also, if the type is too small to read, with a simple and literal pinch of the screen one can easily zoom in.
The iPhone almost seems like a misnomer because all of the special features overshadow the actual phone feature. The phone is accessed through the home screen, which shows a contact list, favorites, recent, and keypad tab. In addition, voicemail appears in a list and can be accessed and listened to individually. Text messaging, which is also done using the touch screen keyboard, appears on the screen like instant messaging.
As of now, there is no other product that is on the same level as the iPhone. The quest to find out whether or not Andover students are in love with Apple’s iPhone must be postponed. Andover can only wait until next Fall Term to see whether students embrace or hate the new iPhone.
On January 11, Apple released the multi-functional iPhone prototype to the public. The iPhone combines all the joys of modern technology – an iPod, a digital camera, Internet access, and a cellular phone – into one sleek and easy to use device. To many, the iPhone is the zenith of all things snazzy.
However, excited consumers must realize that Apple only released the iPhone prototype, which cannot be purchased until June. Also, one bottom line question still remains: Will Andover students purchase the product?
Most see the plethora of functions on the iPhone as a chance to replace other products. Nicole Duddy ’08 said, “When I go out, I always have my cell phone, iPod, and camera in my pockets. Sometimes, I even carry around my laptop for convenience. I want the iPhone because that means I only need to carry around on thing!”
Before the iPhone, companies tried to down size products. Devices became thinner and more compact, such as the credit card-size Canon Powershot, Motorola’s RAZR phone, and Apple’s iPod Nano. But with the iPhone, Apple introduces a new trend to compact everything together.
However, other students seem skeptical about the product. Daniah Missmar ’09 said, “I want to wait a couple more years until Apple has completely perfected the product. This product is so new and so innovative, I’m afraid there will be too many problems with it.”
Furthermore, Andover students see Apple’s contract with the phone company Cingular as both a hindrance and a benefit. Cingular’s exclusivity could be a real problem. First, the company will have a monopoly on the phone service for iPhone consumers. Second, residents in Vermont and Nevada are excluded from the iPhone frenzy due to Cingular’s gaps in wireless service.
But this business deal was exactly what the two companies had intended. James Rockas ’08 said, “Even though I have Verizon and I get better service on campus, I will give that up to get the iPhone and switch over to Cingular.”
Joseph Mensah ’08 is embracing the fact that Apple has collaborated with Cingular. “I have built up credit with Cingular, so as soon as the iPhone is released, I can use the credit and upgrade my phone. The deal is too sweet to pass up.”
The iPhone’s price tag, currently at $499 for a four-gigabyte model and $100 more for the eight-gigabyte model, has some PA students cringing.
Brianna McCarthy ’09 said, “The iPhone seems really cool but what if I lose it? It’s too expensive to take that risk.” Other students agree. They fear that in one fell swoop everything – music, videos, phone, Internet, and photos – can be lost.”
Perhaps for some, the price is more acceptable when they consider all the features and bragging rights that come when you are one of the first to own an iPhone.
Even with debates of whether or not the convenience and reliability of the iPhone is worth the price, one thing is for sure – the iPhone lives up to its hype.
The device is 0.46 inches thinner than many popular competitors, including the Blackberry Pearl and Palm Treo. There will inevitably be comparisons between the iPhone and many other smartphones like Motorola’s Q, but the completely flat 3.5-inch screen stands out from the others.
Also, upon first sight, many people confusedly ask, “But what about all of the keys and buttons?” This is another aspect to the iPhone’s genius. If the phone function is in use, a touch sensitive number pad appears on screen. Searching on the Internet? A full QWERTY keyboard appears that is so intuitive that it senses any range of mistakes and automatically corrects itself.
Furthermore, the iPod feature on the device can be used for sixteen hours of audio playback and five hours of video watching. However, unlike the swirling finger motions to control the iPod, all one has to do to scroll through playlists is sweep one finger up or down. With up to eight gigabytes of storage, it has roughly the same amount of memory as the highest volume iPod Nano. For watching TV shows or movies from the iTunes store, the device can be laid on its side, whereupon the iPhone will sense the switch in orientation and transform into widescreen mode.
A similar aspect can be used on the photo feature of the iPhone. The innovators at Mac even flawlessly integrated a two megapixel camera into the phone. Many iPod users will really appreciate this new feature, especially since iPods can only store and display photos.
Finally, the breakthrough feature of this gadget is the highly advanced Internet feature. Access to the Web is gained through WiFi, the common wireless medium, or Cingular’s EDGE system. Unlike viewing microscopic and condensed versions of a website on current cell phones, the iPhone allows one to view the exact same thing as one would on a computer monitor with just as much clarity. Also, if the type is too small to read, with a simple and literal pinch of the screen one can easily zoom in.
The iPhone almost seems like a misnomer because all of the special features overshadow the actual phone feature. The phone is accessed through the home screen, which shows a contact list, favorites, recent, and keypad tab. In addition, voicemail appears in a list and can be accessed and listened to individually. Text messaging, which is also done using the touch screen keyboard, appears on the screen like instant messaging.
As of now, there is no other product that is on the same level as the iPhone. The quest to find out whether or not Andover students are in love with Apple’s iPhone must be postponed. Andover can only wait until next Fall Term to see whether students embrace or hate the new iPhone.
Apple, Cisco extend talks on iPhone deal
Apple and Cisco Systems have pushed back a deadline in their legal battle over the iPhone in order to keep working toward a settlement.
Cisco sued Apple last month in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California over its use of the iPhone name, which Cisco uses for some of its own products. The companies have now agreed to give Apple more time to respond to Cisco's suit so the two parties can keep talking in hopes of reaching an agreement on trademark use and interoperability, they said in a brief joint statement Thursday.
Cisco's Linksys consumer products division sells VoIP (voice over Internet Protocol) phones under the iPhone name, which the company said it acquired in its purchase of Infogear in 2000. Apple introduced its iPhone to great fanfare at the Macworld conference last month, and Cisco later said the companies had been negotiating use of the name before the show but never reached a deal.
According to published reports, Cisco would have been willing to license the iPhone name in exchange for Apple making the handset interoperate smoothly with Cisco's products. Linksys is the biggest seller of consumer Wi-Fi access points and is expanding its home product line into the voice and entertainment realms. Apple's iPhone is equipped with Wi-Fi and includes audio, photo and video player software.
Neither Apple nor Cisco could immediately be reached for comment.
Cisco sued Apple last month in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California over its use of the iPhone name, which Cisco uses for some of its own products. The companies have now agreed to give Apple more time to respond to Cisco's suit so the two parties can keep talking in hopes of reaching an agreement on trademark use and interoperability, they said in a brief joint statement Thursday.
Cisco's Linksys consumer products division sells VoIP (voice over Internet Protocol) phones under the iPhone name, which the company said it acquired in its purchase of Infogear in 2000. Apple introduced its iPhone to great fanfare at the Macworld conference last month, and Cisco later said the companies had been negotiating use of the name before the show but never reached a deal.
According to published reports, Cisco would have been willing to license the iPhone name in exchange for Apple making the handset interoperate smoothly with Cisco's products. Linksys is the biggest seller of consumer Wi-Fi access points and is expanding its home product line into the voice and entertainment realms. Apple's iPhone is equipped with Wi-Fi and includes audio, photo and video player software.
Neither Apple nor Cisco could immediately be reached for comment.
Apple's iPhone stirs up rivals, who question `revolutionary' claim
Pablo Gonzalez, a Prada shoe-wearing mobile phone connoisseur who jumps from one new handset to the next, is ready to ditch his $1,000 (euro768) touch-screen mobile phone for Apple's iPhone when it becomes available in June.
Tark Abed, on the other hand, just got the new Samsung BlackJack smart phone a month ago. The industrial designer at Palo Alto-based Speck Design is not keen on spending $500 (euro384) even though he finds the iPhone's sleek interface alluring and innovative.
"I upgraded to an unlimited data plan and got the BlackJack for $149 (euro114)," he said, "and that's a lot of phone already for $149."
Their divergent views underscore why Apple Inc.'s much-hyped seminal mobile phone is all the rage and why, at the same time, incumbent rivals are stirred but say they are not shaken.
The iPhone got everybody _ from techie bloggers to late-night TV hosts _ talking when it arrived fashionably late on the wireless communications scene. Would-be rivals are welcoming the challenge but questioning Apple's claim that the iPhone is "revolutionary."
Apple's competitors predict that even as the gadget will likely boost the company's fortunes, it will have limited market share and fall short of the successes Apple has seen with its iPod portable music player. They contend some of the phone's much-touted features _ such as its touch screen, movement sensors and music player _ are not innovative or new.
"They're just jumping into the party where everyone else is," said Peter Skarzynski, a senior vice president at Samsung Electronics Co.'s telecommunications unit in North America.
Apple is getting in at a time when competition in the mobile phone business is, as ThinkEquity Partners analyst Jonathan Hoopes puts it, "as hot as Hades."
Because nearly everyone already has a wireless device of some sort, the success of the iPhone will depend on whether Apple's notoriously slick marketing machine can persuade consumers to replace their current phones with an iPhone that costs $500 (euro384) or more. In some cases they will have to switch carriers as Apple's gadgets will work only through Cingular Wireless.
"This is not just as easy as going out to buy an iPod," Hoopes said.
The mobile phone market is crowded, yet still growing, and its biggest players are looking for ways to squeeze more profits from declining prices and ever-fickle consumer tastes.
One of the brightest growth spots for the industry has been in mobile phones that function as do-it-all devices capable of not only voice communications, but also data, such as Web-browsing and e-mail.
It is precisely this category called smart phones that Apple is targeting with the iPhone, which triples as a phone, a music player and a mobile Internet device.
Sales of smart phones in North America are estimated to grow from 11 million units in 2007 to 55 million in 2010, according to market research firm Gartner Inc. Worldwide unit sales are projected to nearly quadruple, from 122 million in 2007 to 450 million in 2010.
Nokia Corp. Chief Executive Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo told analysts last week that he doesn't think Nokia, the world's No. 1 handset maker, needs to change its business approach because of the iPhone.
But Apple's entry "will stimulate this market, it's very clear," he said. "The fact that we will see multipurpose devices from many manufacturers, I think it will be good for the industry. And in that way, I very much welcome (Apple to the market)."
Handset makers, which already face cutthroat design and pricing battles among themselves, will be watching as well. Samsung, the third-largest mobile phone maker, is paying particular attention to effects on its line of mid- to high-end phones.
"It'll definitely impact us, but how much, it'll depend," said Dong Jin Oh, president and CEO of the American unit of Samsung.
Samsung and its rivals were just as curious as everyone else Jan. 9 when Apple, after more than two years of rumors and development, finally delivered on the hype.
Nokia employees watched online demonstrations of the iPhone from their trade show booth at the International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas.
Padmasree Warrior, chief technology officer for No. 2 handset maker Motorola Inc., posted a "morning after" blog saying she had always been a fan of Apple's creativity. She called the iPhone a "compelling concept," but she also outlined its potential shortcomings.
"There is nothing revolutionary or disruptive about any of the technologies," she wrote.
With the iPhone still months away from the market, no one knows all its features or how well it functions in real life.
Any criticisms leveled now _ the high price, the exclusive distribution through Cingular Wireless, the choice to use the slower 2.5G data network, the apparent lack of support for Microsoft Corp.'s business e-mail programs, the lack of a traditional QWERTY button keyboard _ could become moot or insignificant later.
If the incumbents are nervous, they are not saying it.
"The iPhone appears to be aimed at consumers; Palm targets prosumers and business customers who require a rich e-mail experience," said Marlene Somsak, a spokeswoman for Palm Inc., maker of Treo smart phones. And those customers also need a full keyboard, she said; typing on the iPhone is done by finger taps on the 3.5-inch (9-centimetre) touch-screen instead of regular buttons.
The Treo was among the smart phone models Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs portrayed as clunky to use and "not so smart" during his inaugural demonstration of the iPhone.
Samsung knows consumer tastes for mobile phones are diverse. In any given year, Samsung has 30 or more models distributed through multiple carriers in the United States and more than 100 worldwide.
"One size doesn't fit all," Skarzynski said. "One look doesn't fit all."
But analysts say mobile phone makers should still be concerned about Apple making inroads into their territory.
"There is now clearly an extremely savvy marketing competitor with a huge user base," Hoopes said. "They better be nervous. But they are all trying to feign complacency."
Tark Abed, on the other hand, just got the new Samsung BlackJack smart phone a month ago. The industrial designer at Palo Alto-based Speck Design is not keen on spending $500 (euro384) even though he finds the iPhone's sleek interface alluring and innovative.
"I upgraded to an unlimited data plan and got the BlackJack for $149 (euro114)," he said, "and that's a lot of phone already for $149."
Their divergent views underscore why Apple Inc.'s much-hyped seminal mobile phone is all the rage and why, at the same time, incumbent rivals are stirred but say they are not shaken.
The iPhone got everybody _ from techie bloggers to late-night TV hosts _ talking when it arrived fashionably late on the wireless communications scene. Would-be rivals are welcoming the challenge but questioning Apple's claim that the iPhone is "revolutionary."
Apple's competitors predict that even as the gadget will likely boost the company's fortunes, it will have limited market share and fall short of the successes Apple has seen with its iPod portable music player. They contend some of the phone's much-touted features _ such as its touch screen, movement sensors and music player _ are not innovative or new.
"They're just jumping into the party where everyone else is," said Peter Skarzynski, a senior vice president at Samsung Electronics Co.'s telecommunications unit in North America.
Apple is getting in at a time when competition in the mobile phone business is, as ThinkEquity Partners analyst Jonathan Hoopes puts it, "as hot as Hades."
Because nearly everyone already has a wireless device of some sort, the success of the iPhone will depend on whether Apple's notoriously slick marketing machine can persuade consumers to replace their current phones with an iPhone that costs $500 (euro384) or more. In some cases they will have to switch carriers as Apple's gadgets will work only through Cingular Wireless.
"This is not just as easy as going out to buy an iPod," Hoopes said.
The mobile phone market is crowded, yet still growing, and its biggest players are looking for ways to squeeze more profits from declining prices and ever-fickle consumer tastes.
One of the brightest growth spots for the industry has been in mobile phones that function as do-it-all devices capable of not only voice communications, but also data, such as Web-browsing and e-mail.
It is precisely this category called smart phones that Apple is targeting with the iPhone, which triples as a phone, a music player and a mobile Internet device.
Sales of smart phones in North America are estimated to grow from 11 million units in 2007 to 55 million in 2010, according to market research firm Gartner Inc. Worldwide unit sales are projected to nearly quadruple, from 122 million in 2007 to 450 million in 2010.
Nokia Corp. Chief Executive Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo told analysts last week that he doesn't think Nokia, the world's No. 1 handset maker, needs to change its business approach because of the iPhone.
But Apple's entry "will stimulate this market, it's very clear," he said. "The fact that we will see multipurpose devices from many manufacturers, I think it will be good for the industry. And in that way, I very much welcome (Apple to the market)."
Handset makers, which already face cutthroat design and pricing battles among themselves, will be watching as well. Samsung, the third-largest mobile phone maker, is paying particular attention to effects on its line of mid- to high-end phones.
"It'll definitely impact us, but how much, it'll depend," said Dong Jin Oh, president and CEO of the American unit of Samsung.
Samsung and its rivals were just as curious as everyone else Jan. 9 when Apple, after more than two years of rumors and development, finally delivered on the hype.
Nokia employees watched online demonstrations of the iPhone from their trade show booth at the International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas.
Padmasree Warrior, chief technology officer for No. 2 handset maker Motorola Inc., posted a "morning after" blog saying she had always been a fan of Apple's creativity. She called the iPhone a "compelling concept," but she also outlined its potential shortcomings.
"There is nothing revolutionary or disruptive about any of the technologies," she wrote.
With the iPhone still months away from the market, no one knows all its features or how well it functions in real life.
Any criticisms leveled now _ the high price, the exclusive distribution through Cingular Wireless, the choice to use the slower 2.5G data network, the apparent lack of support for Microsoft Corp.'s business e-mail programs, the lack of a traditional QWERTY button keyboard _ could become moot or insignificant later.
If the incumbents are nervous, they are not saying it.
"The iPhone appears to be aimed at consumers; Palm targets prosumers and business customers who require a rich e-mail experience," said Marlene Somsak, a spokeswoman for Palm Inc., maker of Treo smart phones. And those customers also need a full keyboard, she said; typing on the iPhone is done by finger taps on the 3.5-inch (9-centimetre) touch-screen instead of regular buttons.
The Treo was among the smart phone models Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs portrayed as clunky to use and "not so smart" during his inaugural demonstration of the iPhone.
Samsung knows consumer tastes for mobile phones are diverse. In any given year, Samsung has 30 or more models distributed through multiple carriers in the United States and more than 100 worldwide.
"One size doesn't fit all," Skarzynski said. "One look doesn't fit all."
But analysts say mobile phone makers should still be concerned about Apple making inroads into their territory.
"There is now clearly an extremely savvy marketing competitor with a huge user base," Hoopes said. "They better be nervous. But they are all trying to feign complacency."
Apple's iPhone stirs up rivals, who question 'revolutionary' claim
SAN JOSE, California: Pablo Gonzalez, a Prada shoe-wearing cell phone connoisseur who jumps from one new handset to the next, is ready to ditch his $1,000 (€768) touch-screen cell phone for Apple's iPhone when it becomes available in June.
Tark Abed, on the other hand, just got the new Samsung BlackJack smart phone a month ago. The industrial designer at Palo Alto-based Speck Design is not keen on spending $500 (€384) even though he finds the iPhone's sleek interface alluring and innovative.
"I upgraded to an unlimited data plan and got the BlackJack for $149 (€114)," he said, "and that's a lot of phone already for $149."
Their divergent views underscore why Apple Inc.'s much-hyped seminal cell phone is all the rage and why, at the same time, incumbent rivals are stirred but say they are not shaken.
The iPhone got everybody — from techie bloggers to late-night TV hosts — talking when it arrived fashionably late on the wireless communications scene. Would-be rivals are welcoming the challenge but questioning Apple's claim that the iPhone is "revolutionary."
Apple's competitors predict that even as the gadget will likely boost the company's fortunes, it will have limited market share and fall short of the successes Apple has seen with its iPod portable music player. They contend some of the phone's much-touted features — such as its touch screen, movement sensors and music player — are not innovative or new.
"They're just jumping into the party where everyone else is," said Peter Skarzynski, a senior vice president at Samsung Electronics Co.'s telecommunications unit in North America.
Apple is getting in at a time when competition in the cell phone business is, as ThinkEquity Partners analyst Jonathan Hoopes puts it, "as hot as Hades."
Because nearly everyone already has a wireless device of some sort, the success of the iPhone will depend on whether Apple's notoriously slick marketing machine can persuade consumers to replace their current phones with an iPhone that costs $500 (€384) or more. In some cases they will have to switch carriers as Apple's gadgets will work only through Cingular Wireless.
"This is not just as easy as going out to buy an iPod," Hoopes said.
The cell phone market is crowded, yet still growing, and its biggest players are looking for ways to squeeze more profits from declining prices and ever-fickle consumer tastes.
One of the brightest growth spots for the industry has been in cell phones that function as do-it-all devices capable of not only voice communications, but also data, such as Web-browsing and e-mail.
It is precisely this category called smart phones that Apple is targeting with the iPhone, which triples as a phone, a music player and a mobile Internet device.
Sales of smart phones in North America are estimated to grow from 11 million units in 2007 to 55 million in 2010, according to market research firm Gartner Inc. Worldwide unit sales are projected to nearly quadruple, from 122 million in 2007 to 450 million in 2010.
Nokia Corp. Chief Executive Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo told analysts last week that he doesn't think Nokia, the world's No. 1 handset maker, needs to change its business approach because of the iPhone.
But Apple's entry "will stimulate this market, it's very clear," he said. "The fact that we will see multipurpose devices from many manufacturers, I think it will be good for the industry. And in that way, I very much welcome (Apple to the market)."
Handset makers, which already face cutthroat design and pricing battles among themselves, will be watching as well. Samsung, the third-largest cell phone maker, is paying particular attention to effects on its line of mid- to high-end phones.
"It'll definitely impact us, but how much, it'll depend," said Dong Jin Oh, president and CEO of the American unit of Samsung.
Samsung and its rivals were just as curious as everyone else Jan. 9 when Apple, after more than two years of rumors and development, finally delivered on the hype.
Nokia employees watched online demonstrations of the iPhone from their trade show booth at the International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas.
Padmasree Warrior, chief technology officer for No. 2 handset maker Motorola Inc., posted a "morning after" blog saying she had always been a fan of Apple's creativity. She called the iPhone a "compelling concept," but she also outlined its potential shortcomings.
"There is nothing revolutionary or disruptive about any of the technologies," she wrote.
With the iPhone still months away from the market, no one knows all its features or how well it functions in real life.
Any criticisms leveled now — the high price, the exclusive distribution through Cingular Wireless, the choice to use the slower 2.5G data network, the apparent lack of support for Microsoft Corp.'s business e-mail programs, the lack of a traditional QWERTY button keyboard — could become moot or insignificant later.
If the incumbents are nervous, they are not saying it.
"The iPhone appears to be aimed at consumers; Palm targets prosumers and business customers who require a rich e-mail experience," said Marlene Somsak, a spokeswoman for Palm Inc., maker of Treo smart phones. And those customers also need a full keyboard, she said; typing on the iPhone is done by finger taps on the 3.5-inch (9-centimeter) touch-screen instead of regular buttons.
The Treo was among the smart phone models Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs portrayed as clunky to use and "not so smart" during his inaugural demonstration of the iPhone.
Samsung knows consumer tastes for cell phones are diverse. In any given year, Samsung has 30 or more models distributed through multiple carriers in the United States and more than 100 worldwide.
"One size doesn't fit all," Skarzynski said. "One look doesn't fit all."
But analysts say cell phone makers should still be concerned about Apple making inroads into their territory.
"There is now clearly an extremely savvy marketing competitor with a huge user base," Hoopes said. "They better be nervous. But they are all trying to feign complacency."
Tark Abed, on the other hand, just got the new Samsung BlackJack smart phone a month ago. The industrial designer at Palo Alto-based Speck Design is not keen on spending $500 (€384) even though he finds the iPhone's sleek interface alluring and innovative.
"I upgraded to an unlimited data plan and got the BlackJack for $149 (€114)," he said, "and that's a lot of phone already for $149."
Their divergent views underscore why Apple Inc.'s much-hyped seminal cell phone is all the rage and why, at the same time, incumbent rivals are stirred but say they are not shaken.
The iPhone got everybody — from techie bloggers to late-night TV hosts — talking when it arrived fashionably late on the wireless communications scene. Would-be rivals are welcoming the challenge but questioning Apple's claim that the iPhone is "revolutionary."
Apple's competitors predict that even as the gadget will likely boost the company's fortunes, it will have limited market share and fall short of the successes Apple has seen with its iPod portable music player. They contend some of the phone's much-touted features — such as its touch screen, movement sensors and music player — are not innovative or new.
"They're just jumping into the party where everyone else is," said Peter Skarzynski, a senior vice president at Samsung Electronics Co.'s telecommunications unit in North America.
Apple is getting in at a time when competition in the cell phone business is, as ThinkEquity Partners analyst Jonathan Hoopes puts it, "as hot as Hades."
Because nearly everyone already has a wireless device of some sort, the success of the iPhone will depend on whether Apple's notoriously slick marketing machine can persuade consumers to replace their current phones with an iPhone that costs $500 (€384) or more. In some cases they will have to switch carriers as Apple's gadgets will work only through Cingular Wireless.
"This is not just as easy as going out to buy an iPod," Hoopes said.
The cell phone market is crowded, yet still growing, and its biggest players are looking for ways to squeeze more profits from declining prices and ever-fickle consumer tastes.
One of the brightest growth spots for the industry has been in cell phones that function as do-it-all devices capable of not only voice communications, but also data, such as Web-browsing and e-mail.
It is precisely this category called smart phones that Apple is targeting with the iPhone, which triples as a phone, a music player and a mobile Internet device.
Sales of smart phones in North America are estimated to grow from 11 million units in 2007 to 55 million in 2010, according to market research firm Gartner Inc. Worldwide unit sales are projected to nearly quadruple, from 122 million in 2007 to 450 million in 2010.
Nokia Corp. Chief Executive Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo told analysts last week that he doesn't think Nokia, the world's No. 1 handset maker, needs to change its business approach because of the iPhone.
But Apple's entry "will stimulate this market, it's very clear," he said. "The fact that we will see multipurpose devices from many manufacturers, I think it will be good for the industry. And in that way, I very much welcome (Apple to the market)."
Handset makers, which already face cutthroat design and pricing battles among themselves, will be watching as well. Samsung, the third-largest cell phone maker, is paying particular attention to effects on its line of mid- to high-end phones.
"It'll definitely impact us, but how much, it'll depend," said Dong Jin Oh, president and CEO of the American unit of Samsung.
Samsung and its rivals were just as curious as everyone else Jan. 9 when Apple, after more than two years of rumors and development, finally delivered on the hype.
Nokia employees watched online demonstrations of the iPhone from their trade show booth at the International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas.
Padmasree Warrior, chief technology officer for No. 2 handset maker Motorola Inc., posted a "morning after" blog saying she had always been a fan of Apple's creativity. She called the iPhone a "compelling concept," but she also outlined its potential shortcomings.
"There is nothing revolutionary or disruptive about any of the technologies," she wrote.
With the iPhone still months away from the market, no one knows all its features or how well it functions in real life.
Any criticisms leveled now — the high price, the exclusive distribution through Cingular Wireless, the choice to use the slower 2.5G data network, the apparent lack of support for Microsoft Corp.'s business e-mail programs, the lack of a traditional QWERTY button keyboard — could become moot or insignificant later.
If the incumbents are nervous, they are not saying it.
"The iPhone appears to be aimed at consumers; Palm targets prosumers and business customers who require a rich e-mail experience," said Marlene Somsak, a spokeswoman for Palm Inc., maker of Treo smart phones. And those customers also need a full keyboard, she said; typing on the iPhone is done by finger taps on the 3.5-inch (9-centimeter) touch-screen instead of regular buttons.
The Treo was among the smart phone models Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs portrayed as clunky to use and "not so smart" during his inaugural demonstration of the iPhone.
Samsung knows consumer tastes for cell phones are diverse. In any given year, Samsung has 30 or more models distributed through multiple carriers in the United States and more than 100 worldwide.
"One size doesn't fit all," Skarzynski said. "One look doesn't fit all."
But analysts say cell phone makers should still be concerned about Apple making inroads into their territory.
"There is now clearly an extremely savvy marketing competitor with a huge user base," Hoopes said. "They better be nervous. But they are all trying to feign complacency."
Apple, Cisco, Ready for an IPhone Truce?
Apple Inc. and Cisco Systems Inc. are apparently suspending their court battle over the iPhone to return to the negotiations table.
Although Cisco's lawsuit against Apple remains pending, the two companies have agreed to extend the time Apple has to respond so that the parties can discuss trademark rights and interoperability, the companies said late Wednesday. The aim, they said, is to reach an agreement over the matter.
San Jose-based Cisco, which makes routers and switches to link networks and power the Internet, has owned the trademark on the name "iPhone" since 2000 and began shipping its own line of iPhone-branded Internet-enabled phones in the spring of 2006.
Then when Apple announced its mobile phone-iPod-Internet communications device last month and called it "iPhone," negotiations between the tech companies ended with a loud thud. Cisco sued Apple the following day claiming trademark infringement.
Cisco claims Apple's new device is "deceptively and confusingly similar" to its own line of wireless phones from Cisco's Linksys division. Cupertino-based Apple says it's entitled to use the name "iPhone" because its device operates over a cellular network, unlike Cisco's phones, which use the Internet. Apple plans to start selling its iPhone in June.
During a recent conference call with analysts, Apple's Chief Operating Officer Tim Cook called the Cisco lawsuit "silly" and said Cisco's trademark registration was "tenuous at best."
"If Cisco wants to challenge us," Cook said, "we're confident we'll prevail."
Under federal law, two companies may share a trademark as long as their uses aren't confusingly similar. Apple has battled another Apple over trademark before: Apple Corps, the Beatles' recording company, had sued the computer company over its entry into the music business.
Despite the more recent legal skirmish, Cisco is pushing ahead with its own Linksys iPhone. It took out a full page ad in Thursday's edition of The New York Times to promote the product and included the small "R" for registered trademark next to the name.
The ad, touting "iPhone: More than talk!" featured two women sitting back to back on a grassy field, one using a phone and the other a laptop _ an Apple laptop.
Although Cisco's lawsuit against Apple remains pending, the two companies have agreed to extend the time Apple has to respond so that the parties can discuss trademark rights and interoperability, the companies said late Wednesday. The aim, they said, is to reach an agreement over the matter.
San Jose-based Cisco, which makes routers and switches to link networks and power the Internet, has owned the trademark on the name "iPhone" since 2000 and began shipping its own line of iPhone-branded Internet-enabled phones in the spring of 2006.
Then when Apple announced its mobile phone-iPod-Internet communications device last month and called it "iPhone," negotiations between the tech companies ended with a loud thud. Cisco sued Apple the following day claiming trademark infringement.
Cisco claims Apple's new device is "deceptively and confusingly similar" to its own line of wireless phones from Cisco's Linksys division. Cupertino-based Apple says it's entitled to use the name "iPhone" because its device operates over a cellular network, unlike Cisco's phones, which use the Internet. Apple plans to start selling its iPhone in June.
During a recent conference call with analysts, Apple's Chief Operating Officer Tim Cook called the Cisco lawsuit "silly" and said Cisco's trademark registration was "tenuous at best."
"If Cisco wants to challenge us," Cook said, "we're confident we'll prevail."
Under federal law, two companies may share a trademark as long as their uses aren't confusingly similar. Apple has battled another Apple over trademark before: Apple Corps, the Beatles' recording company, had sued the computer company over its entry into the music business.
Despite the more recent legal skirmish, Cisco is pushing ahead with its own Linksys iPhone. It took out a full page ad in Thursday's edition of The New York Times to promote the product and included the small "R" for registered trademark next to the name.
The ad, touting "iPhone: More than talk!" featured two women sitting back to back on a grassy field, one using a phone and the other a laptop _ an Apple laptop.
The “iPhone” Brouhaha
One of the more interesting intellectual property lawsuits in recent years is starting to unfold as two IP behemoths — Apple and Cisco — square off over Apple’s new “iPhone.” The alleged issue is trademark infringement.
What make this such an interesting suit is that it really isn’t about trademarks. There are deeper business issues, and it was a negotiations impasse caused the twin events — Apple’s new product announcement and Cisco’s lawsuit announcement.
This isn’t one of those cases where somebody adopted a name only to discover that somebody else had the name. No. Apple knew full well that Cisco owned the name. In fact, Apple and Cisco had been talking for several weeks about working together. The problem was the business philosophies of the two companies.
Mark Chandler, Cicso’s senior vice president and general counsel, said in a blog, “What were the issues that kept us from agreement? Was it money? No. Was it a royalty on every Apple phone? No. Was it an exchange for Cisco products or services? No.”
What Cisco wanted, according to Chandler, was “an open approach. We hoped out products could interoperate in the future. In our view, the network produces the basis to make this happen — it provides the foundation of innovation that allows converged devices to deliver the services that consumers want.”
Apple, according the The Wall Street Journal, “has kept tight control over internally developed technology to be able to offer exclusive features. Many competitors, for instance, have asked Apple to make it possible for songs purchased from the company’s iTunes music store to be loaded on their portable music players. But only Apple’s hit iPod can do that.”
So when the peace talks failed, Apple and Cisco decided to go to war.
Cisco controls the high ground. They own the iPhone trademark. They bought in 2000 when they acquired Infogear Technology. Infogear’s registrations for iPhone date back to 1996 well before Apple launched its iPods and iMacs. In fact, Cisco has been supporting iPhones for years, according to Chandler, and have begun shipping its new version of iPhone since last spring.
Apple argues that other companies have used “iPhone” for internet-based calls and that Apple is the first to use this name for a cellphone product.
The winners in this case are going to be: Ropers Majeski Kohn & Bentley, intellectual property counsel for Apple, and Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass, legal counsel for Cisco. Don’t hold your breath for an early settlement.
_______
Author
James T. Berger, Managing Editor of The Wiglaf Journal, does extensive work for intellectual property law firms. His particular specialty is developing and critiquing surveys for trademark infringement cases.
What make this such an interesting suit is that it really isn’t about trademarks. There are deeper business issues, and it was a negotiations impasse caused the twin events — Apple’s new product announcement and Cisco’s lawsuit announcement.
This isn’t one of those cases where somebody adopted a name only to discover that somebody else had the name. No. Apple knew full well that Cisco owned the name. In fact, Apple and Cisco had been talking for several weeks about working together. The problem was the business philosophies of the two companies.
Mark Chandler, Cicso’s senior vice president and general counsel, said in a blog, “What were the issues that kept us from agreement? Was it money? No. Was it a royalty on every Apple phone? No. Was it an exchange for Cisco products or services? No.”
What Cisco wanted, according to Chandler, was “an open approach. We hoped out products could interoperate in the future. In our view, the network produces the basis to make this happen — it provides the foundation of innovation that allows converged devices to deliver the services that consumers want.”
Apple, according the The Wall Street Journal, “has kept tight control over internally developed technology to be able to offer exclusive features. Many competitors, for instance, have asked Apple to make it possible for songs purchased from the company’s iTunes music store to be loaded on their portable music players. But only Apple’s hit iPod can do that.”
So when the peace talks failed, Apple and Cisco decided to go to war.
Cisco controls the high ground. They own the iPhone trademark. They bought in 2000 when they acquired Infogear Technology. Infogear’s registrations for iPhone date back to 1996 well before Apple launched its iPods and iMacs. In fact, Cisco has been supporting iPhones for years, according to Chandler, and have begun shipping its new version of iPhone since last spring.
Apple argues that other companies have used “iPhone” for internet-based calls and that Apple is the first to use this name for a cellphone product.
The winners in this case are going to be: Ropers Majeski Kohn & Bentley, intellectual property counsel for Apple, and Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass, legal counsel for Cisco. Don’t hold your breath for an early settlement.
_______
Author
James T. Berger, Managing Editor of The Wiglaf Journal, does extensive work for intellectual property law firms. His particular specialty is developing and critiquing surveys for trademark infringement cases.
New multifeature iPhone not likely to be a huge hit
When we returned from vacation recently and I looked back over the technology headlines I had missed, the one item that struck me was the announcement of a new, $500 gadget called the "iPhone." Didn't I review that thing a while back? I thought.
A few clicks on the controls of the Internet Time Machine proved I wasn't dreaming. I did review a gadget called iPhone - a decade ago.
But lack of originality isn't the only reason that Apple's long-awaited entry into the cell phone business might not be the colossal, lifestyle-changing hit the company created with the iPod.
Yes, the iPhone will sell like hotcakes inside the Apple Cult, but is the heathen public really willing to pay that kind of money for a toy that duplicates what they already own? The iPhone is a slick and very expensive digital music/video player and handheld wireless Web browser that also happens to make phone calls. It won't be available until June, but faithful Macolytes are already lining up to buy it.
The iPhone I tried in January 1997 had nothing to do with Apple and was an entirely different animal - a $500 desktop computer-phone with a 7 1/2-inch touch screen and elfin keyboard. Running software from a company called InfoGear, it was designed to exchange e-mail over a dial-up connection and perform basic Web browsing chores without the bulk or expense of a full PC.
The iPhone worked reasonably well, but ultimately it was a solution in search of a problem. People who wanted Internet access bought real computers instead, and the iPhone disappeared - unmourned.
Eventually, Cisco Systems Inc., the giant networking equipment manufacturer, landed the rights to the iPhone brand when it acquired InfoGear in 2000. On Jan. 10, the day after Apple introduced its version, Cisco sued Apple for trademark infringement.
Cisco argued that Apple's use of "iPhone" conflicted with phones marketed by Cisco's Linksys subsidiary - in packages with "iPhone" stickers plastered over the photo of an existing Linksys model.
But Apple's real problem may be that the new iPhone, like its namesake, is a solution in search of a problem.
Yes, the iPhone is an elegant combination of hardware and software, a delight to the eye and ear. And it will sell a million units the day it's available because the Cult of Apple requires followers to buy whatever chairman-for-life Steve Jobs decides to hawk this month. If Jobs tied a couple of tin cans together with a string and called it a telephone, a million Macolytes would call him a "visionary minimalist" and shell out $500 for it.
But what about the rest of the world? First, consider that most of Apple's target audience already owns a perfectly good iPod (or some other music player) and a perfectly good cell phone. Both may be better than their counterparts in the new combo gadget.
For example, the basic $500 iPhone can store 2 gigabytes of music, while the $600 premium version stores 4 gigs. They use flash memory, like the lightweight iPod Nano line.
But "real" iPods, the models with hard drives, store 30 to 60 gigabytes of music. So music fans who like to travel with their whole collection will have to give up most of their music to use an iPhone - or carry two gadgets, one of which duplicates the other. Macolytes will have no problem with this, but the heathen will probably think twice.
Another issue: Apple is selling the iPhone exclusively through Cingular. That alone should make knowledgeable phone customers suspicious. In Consumer Reports' most recent satisfaction survey of more than 50,000 cell phone customers nationwide, Cingular's service ranked last or next-to-last in every metropolitan area. And for now, at least, the iPhone won't work on Cingular's third-generation, high-speed wireless network, but on an older, slower system.
For users who depend on a cell phone for their livelihood, switching to a less dependable carrier could be a big price to pay for a little extra cool.
And how about the total cost of ownership? Neither Apple nor Cingular has announced monthly pricing, but to access the Web outside of free Wi-Fi hotspots, send e-mail or text messages, download ring tones or use all those other cool online services that Apple is pushing, customers will have to sign up for a data plan that could cost as much as or more than their voice plan.
Despite the millions that wireless carriers have spent marketing these services elsewhere, customers just haven't been buying. According to a report in the Los Angeles Times, data accounted for less than 11 percent of the industry's total service revenue in the first half of 2005.
The irony is that competing wireless carriers may actually wish Cingular and the iPhone well, hoping they'll jump-start a market for services that existing customers have ignored in droves.
Finally, there's the conundrum that confronts all potential buyers of multipurpose devices. The more gadgets you cram into one package, the more things there are to go wrong - and the more likely it is that something will.
When something does go wrong - and given my family's history with broken iPods, that's a near certainty - you'll lose the use of your phone and your music player and your portable Web access while it's being fixed, if indeed it can be fixed. Do you really want your business communications dependent on the health of your music player? Of course, none of these issues will dampen enthusiam for the iPhone inside the Cult. And the iPhone might actually gain a few converts.
The gotta-have-it threshold of consumers - particularly the 20- and 30-somethings who buy these gadgets - has been increasing with their disposable income. Sony's PS3 and Microsoft's Xbox 360 game consoles are flying off the shelves at $500 to $600.
For many of their buyers, the iPhone could be another toy to add to their collections.
A few clicks on the controls of the Internet Time Machine proved I wasn't dreaming. I did review a gadget called iPhone - a decade ago.
But lack of originality isn't the only reason that Apple's long-awaited entry into the cell phone business might not be the colossal, lifestyle-changing hit the company created with the iPod.
Yes, the iPhone will sell like hotcakes inside the Apple Cult, but is the heathen public really willing to pay that kind of money for a toy that duplicates what they already own? The iPhone is a slick and very expensive digital music/video player and handheld wireless Web browser that also happens to make phone calls. It won't be available until June, but faithful Macolytes are already lining up to buy it.
The iPhone I tried in January 1997 had nothing to do with Apple and was an entirely different animal - a $500 desktop computer-phone with a 7 1/2-inch touch screen and elfin keyboard. Running software from a company called InfoGear, it was designed to exchange e-mail over a dial-up connection and perform basic Web browsing chores without the bulk or expense of a full PC.
The iPhone worked reasonably well, but ultimately it was a solution in search of a problem. People who wanted Internet access bought real computers instead, and the iPhone disappeared - unmourned.
Eventually, Cisco Systems Inc., the giant networking equipment manufacturer, landed the rights to the iPhone brand when it acquired InfoGear in 2000. On Jan. 10, the day after Apple introduced its version, Cisco sued Apple for trademark infringement.
Cisco argued that Apple's use of "iPhone" conflicted with phones marketed by Cisco's Linksys subsidiary - in packages with "iPhone" stickers plastered over the photo of an existing Linksys model.
But Apple's real problem may be that the new iPhone, like its namesake, is a solution in search of a problem.
Yes, the iPhone is an elegant combination of hardware and software, a delight to the eye and ear. And it will sell a million units the day it's available because the Cult of Apple requires followers to buy whatever chairman-for-life Steve Jobs decides to hawk this month. If Jobs tied a couple of tin cans together with a string and called it a telephone, a million Macolytes would call him a "visionary minimalist" and shell out $500 for it.
But what about the rest of the world? First, consider that most of Apple's target audience already owns a perfectly good iPod (or some other music player) and a perfectly good cell phone. Both may be better than their counterparts in the new combo gadget.
For example, the basic $500 iPhone can store 2 gigabytes of music, while the $600 premium version stores 4 gigs. They use flash memory, like the lightweight iPod Nano line.
But "real" iPods, the models with hard drives, store 30 to 60 gigabytes of music. So music fans who like to travel with their whole collection will have to give up most of their music to use an iPhone - or carry two gadgets, one of which duplicates the other. Macolytes will have no problem with this, but the heathen will probably think twice.
Another issue: Apple is selling the iPhone exclusively through Cingular. That alone should make knowledgeable phone customers suspicious. In Consumer Reports' most recent satisfaction survey of more than 50,000 cell phone customers nationwide, Cingular's service ranked last or next-to-last in every metropolitan area. And for now, at least, the iPhone won't work on Cingular's third-generation, high-speed wireless network, but on an older, slower system.
For users who depend on a cell phone for their livelihood, switching to a less dependable carrier could be a big price to pay for a little extra cool.
And how about the total cost of ownership? Neither Apple nor Cingular has announced monthly pricing, but to access the Web outside of free Wi-Fi hotspots, send e-mail or text messages, download ring tones or use all those other cool online services that Apple is pushing, customers will have to sign up for a data plan that could cost as much as or more than their voice plan.
Despite the millions that wireless carriers have spent marketing these services elsewhere, customers just haven't been buying. According to a report in the Los Angeles Times, data accounted for less than 11 percent of the industry's total service revenue in the first half of 2005.
The irony is that competing wireless carriers may actually wish Cingular and the iPhone well, hoping they'll jump-start a market for services that existing customers have ignored in droves.
Finally, there's the conundrum that confronts all potential buyers of multipurpose devices. The more gadgets you cram into one package, the more things there are to go wrong - and the more likely it is that something will.
When something does go wrong - and given my family's history with broken iPods, that's a near certainty - you'll lose the use of your phone and your music player and your portable Web access while it's being fixed, if indeed it can be fixed. Do you really want your business communications dependent on the health of your music player? Of course, none of these issues will dampen enthusiam for the iPhone inside the Cult. And the iPhone might actually gain a few converts.
The gotta-have-it threshold of consumers - particularly the 20- and 30-somethings who buy these gadgets - has been increasing with their disposable income. Sony's PS3 and Microsoft's Xbox 360 game consoles are flying off the shelves at $500 to $600.
For many of their buyers, the iPhone could be another toy to add to their collections.
Make Your Own iPhone
I was browsing TechCrunch earlier and I ran across this printout iPhone, sure to be the hot item this side of June. And given the price of the iPhone it might be as close as many of us get to Apple’s mythical device once it actually comes out.
Anyway, just print-and-fold and you’ve got yourself an iPhone. It won’t actually function, of course, but I’m sure you’ll still be the envy of all your friends.
Cisco Troubles With iPhone Trademark in Canada
By: Christopher Meinck
Cisco is currently filing suit against Apple in the US for trademark infringement. In Canada, Comwave Telecom has been using 'iPhone' for years and has also filed an application with the Canadian Intellectual Property Office. According to CNET, Comwave Telecom has sent Cisco a letter of warning alleging a violation of their 'iPhone' trademark.
The term iPhone has been in use by Comwave since 2004 and they filed for a trademark application in 2005. According to experts quoted in the story, they base trademark awards on such issues as:
First company using the brand name in Canada or in applying to register the name
Apple filed an application for the term 'iPhone' in 2004, prior to Comwave's application. Cisco had filed an application (through Infogear) to obtain a trademark for the iPhone name in 1998, but abandoned those efforts in the middle of 2003. "We recently became aware of Comwave and we're investigating the issue thoroughly," said Cisco spokesman John Noh."Our legal department has put Cisco on notice," said Yuval Barzakay, president of Toronto-based Comwave. "We will see how they react and then gauge our next action."
Cisco is currently filing suit against Apple in the US for trademark infringement. In Canada, Comwave Telecom has been using 'iPhone' for years and has also filed an application with the Canadian Intellectual Property Office. According to CNET, Comwave Telecom has sent Cisco a letter of warning alleging a violation of their 'iPhone' trademark.
The term iPhone has been in use by Comwave since 2004 and they filed for a trademark application in 2005. According to experts quoted in the story, they base trademark awards on such issues as:
First company using the brand name in Canada or in applying to register the name
Apple filed an application for the term 'iPhone' in 2004, prior to Comwave's application. Cisco had filed an application (through Infogear) to obtain a trademark for the iPhone name in 1998, but abandoned those efforts in the middle of 2003. "We recently became aware of Comwave and we're investigating the issue thoroughly," said Cisco spokesman John Noh."Our legal department has put Cisco on notice," said Yuval Barzakay, president of Toronto-based Comwave. "We will see how they react and then gauge our next action."
iPhone could be exclusive to Carphone Warehouse
Carphone Warehouse, Europes largest mobile phone retailer, wants exclusive rights to sell the iPhone in the UK later this year.
While the final decision will be down to Apple we wouldn’t bet against them choosing a single retailer for the UK like they did with Cingular in the US.
Charles Dunstone, CEO of Carphone Warehouse, discussed the iPhone during the companies quarterly results and said he is looking for an exclusive deal with Apple in the UK. Optimistically the company has a pre-order form on their website already.
Although the results for 2006 were very good for Carphone, which has 700 stores in the UK and has signed up 3.26 million subscribers in the last 3 months, it is suffering after losing the rights to sell Vodafone contracts. Since Vodafone signed an exclusive deal with Phones4U Carphone has been unable to sell any Vodafone deals in its stores. Dunstone sees this as the biggest threat for 2007.
If Carphone Warehouse can secure exclusive rights to the iPhone its clear that Vodafone would come running back pretty quickly. For Apple to sign with a retailer in the UK rather than a network makes a lot of sense. Networks are a matter for personal preference and a lot of people would not be willing to switch or pay an upgrade fee to get the iPhone on their current contract. Carphone would have access to the majority of networks, all of them if Vodafone signs another deal, and is best placed to sell more iPhones than any other retailer.
The strong results for 2006 are apparently due to cheap prices of Motorola handsets resulting in large volumes of sales.
While the final decision will be down to Apple we wouldn’t bet against them choosing a single retailer for the UK like they did with Cingular in the US.
Charles Dunstone, CEO of Carphone Warehouse, discussed the iPhone during the companies quarterly results and said he is looking for an exclusive deal with Apple in the UK. Optimistically the company has a pre-order form on their website already.
Although the results for 2006 were very good for Carphone, which has 700 stores in the UK and has signed up 3.26 million subscribers in the last 3 months, it is suffering after losing the rights to sell Vodafone contracts. Since Vodafone signed an exclusive deal with Phones4U Carphone has been unable to sell any Vodafone deals in its stores. Dunstone sees this as the biggest threat for 2007.
If Carphone Warehouse can secure exclusive rights to the iPhone its clear that Vodafone would come running back pretty quickly. For Apple to sign with a retailer in the UK rather than a network makes a lot of sense. Networks are a matter for personal preference and a lot of people would not be willing to switch or pay an upgrade fee to get the iPhone on their current contract. Carphone would have access to the majority of networks, all of them if Vodafone signs another deal, and is best placed to sell more iPhones than any other retailer.
The strong results for 2006 are apparently due to cheap prices of Motorola handsets resulting in large volumes of sales.
Researcher: iPhone is no smart phone
The iPhone is clever in design and has some nifty capabilities, but the combination mobile phone and digital music player is not a smart phone, a market researcher said Thursday.
Much of the media has placed Apple's device, unveiled this month at the Macworld conference in San Francisco, in the same category as gadgets like the Palm Treo, the Motorola Q, and Research In Motion's (RIM) BlackBerry Pearl. But the major difference between those devices and the iPhone is the fact that Apple's gizmo is closed to third-party applications.
"Therefore, we must conclude at this point that, based on our current definition, the iPhone is not a smart phone: it is a very high-end feature phone," Philip Solis, analyst for ABI Research said.
At $500, the iPhone is considerably more expensive then smart phones, which are priced as low as $200. Many of those phones, however, lack the music capabilities of the iPhone.
Having an open, commercial operating system that supports third-party applications promotes competition in the software space, and produces products that add value to the device. Solis said. "Feature phones have third-party applications too -- but these are relatively weak and limited applications that work with the middleware, such as Java and BREW."
Applications designed for smart phones can access core functionality within the operating system, and tend to be more powerful and efficient than third-party software on feature phones. "The competition in an open environment also yields more cutting edge, rich applications," Solis said.
ABI said it believes the closed system chosen by Apple for the iPhone could hamper sales. "Consumers will not be willing to settle for a second-rate cell phone just to have superior music," ABI analyst Stuart Carlaw said.
Much of the media has placed Apple's device, unveiled this month at the Macworld conference in San Francisco, in the same category as gadgets like the Palm Treo, the Motorola Q, and Research In Motion's (RIM) BlackBerry Pearl. But the major difference between those devices and the iPhone is the fact that Apple's gizmo is closed to third-party applications.
"Therefore, we must conclude at this point that, based on our current definition, the iPhone is not a smart phone: it is a very high-end feature phone," Philip Solis, analyst for ABI Research said.
At $500, the iPhone is considerably more expensive then smart phones, which are priced as low as $200. Many of those phones, however, lack the music capabilities of the iPhone.
Having an open, commercial operating system that supports third-party applications promotes competition in the software space, and produces products that add value to the device. Solis said. "Feature phones have third-party applications too -- but these are relatively weak and limited applications that work with the middleware, such as Java and BREW."
Applications designed for smart phones can access core functionality within the operating system, and tend to be more powerful and efficient than third-party software on feature phones. "The competition in an open environment also yields more cutting edge, rich applications," Solis said.
ABI said it believes the closed system chosen by Apple for the iPhone could hamper sales. "Consumers will not be willing to settle for a second-rate cell phone just to have superior music," ABI analyst Stuart Carlaw said.
Apple's 'iPhone' problems in Canada
Apple could face yet another lawsuit over the use of the iPhone moniker for its forthcoming "revolutionary" mobile phone. Announced earlier this month, Apple apparently snubbed a protracted period of good-faith negotiations with Cisco, by announcing the product at Macworld Expo with a US launch date of June. A new report says that Apple will likely face iPhone branding problems in Canada as well. Bloomberg reports that Comwave Telecom has used the iPhone brand since 2004 to sell Internet phone service to its customers and filed documents opposing Apple's motion to take the name. Despite reports on Thursday that confirmed Rogers Wireless would serve as the sole provider for Apple's iPhone in Canada, the company has not formally announced plans to ship the iPhone in Canada.
Responding to the possible iPhone naming controversy in Canada, the Cupertino-based company said that it had "nothing to announce at this time" about plans to sell the phone in Canada and declined to comment further.
Company president Yuval Barzakay said in an interview yesterday that his closely held company of about 100 employees plans to fight for its rights. He, however, declined to say how many customers the Toronto-based company has or disclose its revenue, according to the report.
"It's a crucial brand for us," said Barzakay, 36. "Our legal folks believe we're certainly in the driver's seat." Until Apple offers the iPhone in Canada, Comwave has no reason to claim damages, he told Bloomberg.
With current challenges from LG's Prada mobile phone and possible competition from Google and Samsung, Apple's naming troubles could have been easily avoided. Cisco CEO John Chambers described the company's lawsuit against Apple as a "minor skirmish," saying that the iPhone name-related confrontation could have been avoided if Apple had been willing to negotiate. Cisco owned the 'iPhone' trademark since 2000 when it acquired a firm that had registered the name, but waited to use the name until it launched a Linksys-branded product.
"We told Apple for five years, 'This is our trademark. We'll license it to you, but it is ours,'" Chambers said. "All we ask is that people respect our trademarks and our intellectual property. We would have traded that for just interoperability, or the ability of the Apple phone to work smoothly with Cisco products."
Responding to the possible iPhone naming controversy in Canada, the Cupertino-based company said that it had "nothing to announce at this time" about plans to sell the phone in Canada and declined to comment further.
Company president Yuval Barzakay said in an interview yesterday that his closely held company of about 100 employees plans to fight for its rights. He, however, declined to say how many customers the Toronto-based company has or disclose its revenue, according to the report.
"It's a crucial brand for us," said Barzakay, 36. "Our legal folks believe we're certainly in the driver's seat." Until Apple offers the iPhone in Canada, Comwave has no reason to claim damages, he told Bloomberg.
With current challenges from LG's Prada mobile phone and possible competition from Google and Samsung, Apple's naming troubles could have been easily avoided. Cisco CEO John Chambers described the company's lawsuit against Apple as a "minor skirmish," saying that the iPhone name-related confrontation could have been avoided if Apple had been willing to negotiate. Cisco owned the 'iPhone' trademark since 2000 when it acquired a firm that had registered the name, but waited to use the name until it launched a Linksys-branded product.
"We told Apple for five years, 'This is our trademark. We'll license it to you, but it is ours,'" Chambers said. "All we ask is that people respect our trademarks and our intellectual property. We would have traded that for just interoperability, or the ability of the Apple phone to work smoothly with Cisco products."
Researcher: iPhone no smart phone
The iPhone is clever in design and has some nifty capabilities, but the combination mobile phone and digital music player isn't a smartphone, a market researcher said Thursday.
Much of the media has placed Apple's device, unveiled this month at the Macworld conference in San Francisco, in the same category as gadgets like the Palm Treo, the Motorola Q, and Research In Motion's BlackBerry Pearl. But the major difference between those devices and the iPhone is the fact that Apple's gizmo is closed to third-party applications.
"Therefore, we must conclude at this point that, based on our current definition, the iPhone is not a smart phone; it's a very high-end feature phone," says Philip Solis, an analyst for ABI Research.
At $500, the iPhone is considerably more expensive than smartphones, which are priced as low as $200. Many of those phones, however, lack the music capabilities of the iPhone.
Having an open, commercial operating system that supports third-party applications promotes competition in the software space and produces products that add value to the device, Solis says. "Feature phones have third-party applications too, but these are relatively weak and limited to applications that work with the middleware such as Java and Brew."
Applications designed for smartphones can access core functionality within the operating system and tend to be more powerful and efficient than third-party software on feature phones. "The competition in an open environment also yields more cutting edge, rich applications," Solis says.
ABI says the closed system chosen by Apple for the iPhone could hamper sales. "Consumers will not be willing to settle for a second-rate cell phone just to have superior music," ABI analyst Stuart Carlaw says.
Much of the media has placed Apple's device, unveiled this month at the Macworld conference in San Francisco, in the same category as gadgets like the Palm Treo, the Motorola Q, and Research In Motion's BlackBerry Pearl. But the major difference between those devices and the iPhone is the fact that Apple's gizmo is closed to third-party applications.
"Therefore, we must conclude at this point that, based on our current definition, the iPhone is not a smart phone; it's a very high-end feature phone," says Philip Solis, an analyst for ABI Research.
At $500, the iPhone is considerably more expensive than smartphones, which are priced as low as $200. Many of those phones, however, lack the music capabilities of the iPhone.
Having an open, commercial operating system that supports third-party applications promotes competition in the software space and produces products that add value to the device, Solis says. "Feature phones have third-party applications too, but these are relatively weak and limited to applications that work with the middleware such as Java and Brew."
Applications designed for smartphones can access core functionality within the operating system and tend to be more powerful and efficient than third-party software on feature phones. "The competition in an open environment also yields more cutting edge, rich applications," Solis says.
ABI says the closed system chosen by Apple for the iPhone could hamper sales. "Consumers will not be willing to settle for a second-rate cell phone just to have superior music," ABI analyst Stuart Carlaw says.
The iPhone is No Smartphone - Report
Apple's iPhone was the talk of the town after its January 9 launch. Industry observers were by and large impressed with the new device, praising its user interface, innovation, and seamless integration. But two senior ABI Research analysts -- wireless research director Stuart Carlaw, and principal mobile broadband analyst Philip Solis -- point out that while the iPhone is undoubtedly clever and capable, it is not correct to call it a smartphone, as much of the media has done.
ABI Research defines a smartphone as a cellular handset using an open, commercial operating system that supports third party applications. The iPhone runs the Apple Macintosh computer operating system, OS X, so at first glance it would seem to fall into the smartphone category, which might help justify its announced $500+ pricetag. But, says Solis, "It turns out that this device will be closed to third party applications. Therefore we must conclude at this point that, based on our current definition, the iPhone is not a smartphone: it is a very high-end feature phone."
Feature phones' functionality (dictated by the software which controls the hardware) is closed and controlled by an operator or the device manufacturer, whereas smartphones are supported by a third-party ecosystem, where competition in the software space creates applications that add value. "Sure," concedes Solis, "feature phones have third party applications too - but these are relatively weak and limited applications that work with the middleware such as Java and BREW. Applications designed for smartphones can be written to access core functionality from the OS itself, and are therefore usually more powerful and efficient. The competition in an open environment also yields more cutting edge, rich applications."
Stuart Carlaw adds, "Consumers will not be willing to settle for a second-rate cell phone just to have superior music. Apple must get the phone engineering part of the equation right, and it is difficult to see how they will accomplish that with no track record in the industry. Even though they are working with some prominent suppliers, the task of putting all of the building blocks together cannot be underestimated."
ABI Research defines a smartphone as a cellular handset using an open, commercial operating system that supports third party applications. The iPhone runs the Apple Macintosh computer operating system, OS X, so at first glance it would seem to fall into the smartphone category, which might help justify its announced $500+ pricetag. But, says Solis, "It turns out that this device will be closed to third party applications. Therefore we must conclude at this point that, based on our current definition, the iPhone is not a smartphone: it is a very high-end feature phone."
Feature phones' functionality (dictated by the software which controls the hardware) is closed and controlled by an operator or the device manufacturer, whereas smartphones are supported by a third-party ecosystem, where competition in the software space creates applications that add value. "Sure," concedes Solis, "feature phones have third party applications too - but these are relatively weak and limited applications that work with the middleware such as Java and BREW. Applications designed for smartphones can be written to access core functionality from the OS itself, and are therefore usually more powerful and efficient. The competition in an open environment also yields more cutting edge, rich applications."
Stuart Carlaw adds, "Consumers will not be willing to settle for a second-rate cell phone just to have superior music. Apple must get the phone engineering part of the equation right, and it is difficult to see how they will accomplish that with no track record in the industry. Even though they are working with some prominent suppliers, the task of putting all of the building blocks together cannot be underestimated."
iPhone: HP gets 'touchy'
Hewlett-Packard's new TouchSmart PC is more likely to popularise "touch-based" communications than Apple's iPhone, a senior HP executive claimed.
In an interview, Ameer Karim, HP's director of Worldwide Product Marketing for Consumer PC and Digital Entertainment, said there was a "cult" surrounding the as-yet unreleased Apple mobile phone.
"Who's going to spend $600 on a phone? We believe we'll be able to deliver more touch devices through TouchSmart PCs than the iPhone," Karim said at the launch of HP's new consumer desktop and notebook range in Seoul, South Korea.
He said he believed MP3 players in phones were impractical because if they were dropped while exercising and listening to music, for example, a customer would lose their only form of communication.
But Karim conceded that "there’s going to be a cult following that will buy the iPhone regardless of the price."
Stacy Wolff, director of Mobile Product Design at HP, said that Apple has had a great effect on the PC industry. "We all respect Apple. There is no-one in the industry who doesn't."
Apart from the TouchSmart PC, HP also unveiled the entry-level convertible TX1000 notebook.
The TouchSmart PC uses optical sensors to detect touch input on a 19" LCD screen, and will be available in Australia in April from US$2,499. Local pricing is yet to be announced.
Both the TouchSmart and the TX1000 use the AMD Turion X2 chip instead of the more popular Intel Core Duo. Adrian Koch, senior vice president of HP Personal Systems Group for Asia-Pacific, said this was based on timing, and it was still working with Intel on other products in the new range.
"HP believes in customer choice. We have worked with both companies (Intel and AMD) for a very, very long time. Sometimes this will change for a given time", Koch said.
Other products launched include a Compaq Presario desktop, the HP iPAQ rw6828, and a series of desk-friendly HP Pavillion PCs.
Ty Pendlebury travelled to Seoul as a guest of HP.
In an interview, Ameer Karim, HP's director of Worldwide Product Marketing for Consumer PC and Digital Entertainment, said there was a "cult" surrounding the as-yet unreleased Apple mobile phone.
"Who's going to spend $600 on a phone? We believe we'll be able to deliver more touch devices through TouchSmart PCs than the iPhone," Karim said at the launch of HP's new consumer desktop and notebook range in Seoul, South Korea.
He said he believed MP3 players in phones were impractical because if they were dropped while exercising and listening to music, for example, a customer would lose their only form of communication.
But Karim conceded that "there’s going to be a cult following that will buy the iPhone regardless of the price."
Stacy Wolff, director of Mobile Product Design at HP, said that Apple has had a great effect on the PC industry. "We all respect Apple. There is no-one in the industry who doesn't."
Apart from the TouchSmart PC, HP also unveiled the entry-level convertible TX1000 notebook.
The TouchSmart PC uses optical sensors to detect touch input on a 19" LCD screen, and will be available in Australia in April from US$2,499. Local pricing is yet to be announced.
Both the TouchSmart and the TX1000 use the AMD Turion X2 chip instead of the more popular Intel Core Duo. Adrian Koch, senior vice president of HP Personal Systems Group for Asia-Pacific, said this was based on timing, and it was still working with Intel on other products in the new range.
"HP believes in customer choice. We have worked with both companies (Intel and AMD) for a very, very long time. Sometimes this will change for a given time", Koch said.
Other products launched include a Compaq Presario desktop, the HP iPAQ rw6828, and a series of desk-friendly HP Pavillion PCs.
Ty Pendlebury travelled to Seoul as a guest of HP.
How the iPhone could have changed the cell-phone industry but didn't
The iPhone looks pretty sweet. Yep, it's got that fancy touchscreen that you can use two fingers on, it changes direction depending on how you hold it, and it can tell when you're trying to enter a number and when it's rubbing against a pack of smokes in your pocket. It's certainly one of the coolest phones ever designed, if not the coolest, and it's pretty much a guaranteed hit.
You can't really fault Apple on the design unless you want to be really nitpicky, but that's not to say they did everything perfectly. Apple is one of the only device manufacturers on the planet that has the sway to change how the cell-phone business is done, and the iPhone gave the company an opportunity to really change the American cell-phone market for the better. However, when that opportunity knocked, Apple decided to ignore it, leaving the consumer to foot the bill for their laziness.
The Great Rebate Debate
What makes the cell-phone industry in this country so lousy is the fact that in order to buy a phone, you need to sign up for some kind of long-term contract (typically two years). These contracts force you to stick with one provider no matter what. You want to upgrade to a new phone in a year? Well, if you want a rebate (which is why most fancy phones over here are so cheap) you can either re-sign with your carrier for an additional two years or, if the phone you want is only sold by another carrier, you can pay hundreds of dollars to cancel your contract early.
In Europe and Asia consumers aren't faced with these choices. If they want to switch phones or carriers they can do so whenever they please. Switching phones is as easy as swapping SIM cards, and they pay their cell-phone bills month to month. The catch is they also have to pay a premium for their devices, but they're used to it. There are no free phones for signing a contract in Europe, and the notion of having a device subsidized by a carrier is foreign to them.
Here in the States, however, people expect to get their phones for free or close to it. They sign these awful two-year contracts, but in exchange for their promise to pay hundreds of dollars in usage charges to a single carrier, they get $500 phones for less than half their "official" prices.
The Better Call
How could Apple have changed this? Well, it was clear from the hype surrounding the iPhone before it was ever announced that there was a huge demand for this product. People are willing to shell out more for it because of its features and, well, the fact that it's made by Apple. Apple could have sold their iPhone without attaching it to a carrier, allowing people to buy it without a discount and letting them choose who they want to provide service to it. Instead, they went with AT&T in as traditional a partnership as you can get. People will not only have to pay $500 or $600 for the phone, but they'll also need to sign up for two years of AT&T service.
You might be saying, "Yeah, but if there was no two-year commitment, the phone would cost over $1,000!" Not true. The iPhone costs Apple about $250 to manufacture, so there's a 50% profit on every unit sold. That means the two-year contract isn't subsidizing anything and whatever money would go to lowering the cost of the device is just icing on the cake.
So what are we left with? A situation worse than when Apple entered the market. Now we're stuck with the idea that it's just fine to drop $600 for an unsubsidized phone and be forced into signing a two-year contract on top of it. Will this give other phone manufacturers the chutzpah to start keeping the contract subsidies for themselves? Let's hope not. The last thing we need is for one of the most blatantly anticonsumer industries in this country to start thinking they can rip us off even more. Thanks, Apple. Somehow we expected more from you.
Needham: iPhone takes shine off RIM's Pearl
By Aidan Malley
Research In Motion's first genuine chance at breaking out of its stodgy corporate niche may have been prematurely cut short thanks to Apple's introduction of the iPhone, financial analysts at Needham & Co. said on Tuesday in a research note.
In guidance provided to stock traders, analysts John Lynch and Charlie Wolf downgraded RIM's rating from Buy to Hold, pointing to new questions about the Canadian smartphone maker's long-term prospects now that it had to grapple with a more direct competitor to its recently introduced BlackBerry Pearl. Lynch and Wolf together observed that while the Pearl was still the friendliest towards business and government buyers, the iPhone's emphasis on strong performance with a media-savvy focus had the "potential to impinge" on RIM's newly gained toehold in the mainstream.
While RIM is a "moving target" and may have a fresh model on offer by the time the iPhone rolls out in June, the analysts said, Apple's first cellphone may be the only real competitor the Pearl has seen since its September launch. The slim BlackBerry was the first from its creator to integrate a camera -- normally a taboo item for secrecy-obsessed offices -- and shifted attention towards music and video playback while keeping the immediacy of "push" e-mail that earned previous BlackBerries their workplace throne.
The mix is said to have loosened RIM's once stiff public image and has helped bring legions of first-time buyers to its doors. Even so, the Needham analysts warned that this might not be enough to sway mainstream buyers, who might be lured to Apple through better media controls.
"We expect a lot of would-be Pearl buyers will find iPhone's email [sic] to be good enough," Lynch and Wolf wrote, "in light of its unprecedented multimedia functionality and web browsing experience."
Besides its more tempting touchscreen interface, the iPhone's 4GB or 8GB of flash memory makes it a rare breed in the typically storage-shy American market and gives it enough room to store some owners' entire music collections. The Pearl has little free memory built-in and depends almost exclusively on microSD cards to load songs, capping its storage at 2GB.
Still, the analysts note that the iPhone's success is far from a surefire prospect. "Some buyers will need the reliable push email of BlackBerry, and some will balk at iPhone’s gaudy price tag," they said, also expressing caution over the uncertainty of a device whose feature list is far from certain. "We prefer to wait on the sidelines while questions over iPhone’s functionality are hashed out.”
Price may well be the Cupertino's ultimate Achilles Heel as it tries to break RIM's grip. Although far less ambitious, the Pearl that users can buy through AT&T (the iPhone's eventual destination) costs only half the iPhone's intimidating $499 price when part of a two-year contract -- and doesn't require that contract for an eventual sale. The Pearl sells for $399 unattached to any service plan.
In light of such tall barriers, Lynch and Wolf have even raised the possibility of a compromise and suggested that the ascent of one company didn't have to mean the downfall of another. "Both Apple and RIM will be winners," Needham's researchers were quick to add when issuing the Hold rating. "We [only] think our prior estimates were too aggressive."
Research In Motion's first genuine chance at breaking out of its stodgy corporate niche may have been prematurely cut short thanks to Apple's introduction of the iPhone, financial analysts at Needham & Co. said on Tuesday in a research note.
In guidance provided to stock traders, analysts John Lynch and Charlie Wolf downgraded RIM's rating from Buy to Hold, pointing to new questions about the Canadian smartphone maker's long-term prospects now that it had to grapple with a more direct competitor to its recently introduced BlackBerry Pearl. Lynch and Wolf together observed that while the Pearl was still the friendliest towards business and government buyers, the iPhone's emphasis on strong performance with a media-savvy focus had the "potential to impinge" on RIM's newly gained toehold in the mainstream.
While RIM is a "moving target" and may have a fresh model on offer by the time the iPhone rolls out in June, the analysts said, Apple's first cellphone may be the only real competitor the Pearl has seen since its September launch. The slim BlackBerry was the first from its creator to integrate a camera -- normally a taboo item for secrecy-obsessed offices -- and shifted attention towards music and video playback while keeping the immediacy of "push" e-mail that earned previous BlackBerries their workplace throne.
The mix is said to have loosened RIM's once stiff public image and has helped bring legions of first-time buyers to its doors. Even so, the Needham analysts warned that this might not be enough to sway mainstream buyers, who might be lured to Apple through better media controls.
"We expect a lot of would-be Pearl buyers will find iPhone's email [sic] to be good enough," Lynch and Wolf wrote, "in light of its unprecedented multimedia functionality and web browsing experience."
Besides its more tempting touchscreen interface, the iPhone's 4GB or 8GB of flash memory makes it a rare breed in the typically storage-shy American market and gives it enough room to store some owners' entire music collections. The Pearl has little free memory built-in and depends almost exclusively on microSD cards to load songs, capping its storage at 2GB.
Still, the analysts note that the iPhone's success is far from a surefire prospect. "Some buyers will need the reliable push email of BlackBerry, and some will balk at iPhone’s gaudy price tag," they said, also expressing caution over the uncertainty of a device whose feature list is far from certain. "We prefer to wait on the sidelines while questions over iPhone’s functionality are hashed out.”
Price may well be the Cupertino's ultimate Achilles Heel as it tries to break RIM's grip. Although far less ambitious, the Pearl that users can buy through AT&T (the iPhone's eventual destination) costs only half the iPhone's intimidating $499 price when part of a two-year contract -- and doesn't require that contract for an eventual sale. The Pearl sells for $399 unattached to any service plan.
In light of such tall barriers, Lynch and Wolf have even raised the possibility of a compromise and suggested that the ascent of one company didn't have to mean the downfall of another. "Both Apple and RIM will be winners," Needham's researchers were quick to add when issuing the Hold rating. "We [only] think our prior estimates were too aggressive."
Reviews the iPhone (Verdict: Groundbreaking, Expensive, Not Out Yet)
You think our coverage of the iPhone is overblown? Hah! CNET has already reviewed the damn thing (kinda), giving it an 8.3 and the much coveted Editor's Choice label. Ok, so maybe the review is more of a "what would a review look like" type deal, but many of the comments are still relevant.
The iPhone is called "groundbreaking" and CNET lauds its ability to easily switch from a landscape to portrait orientation. CNET also loves the Google Maps integration and the fact that it doubles as a video iPod. CNET does have some issues with the Jesus phone, however.
In case you haven't heard, the iPhone is expensive ($499 for the 4GB, $599 for the 8GB) and CNET doesn't like that. Apparently, the touchscreen is a "facial-oil magnet" and the lack of 3G support is terribly lame. Oh, and there's no wireless integration with the iTunes Store.
We really must salute CNET for taking the time to review a product that won't be available for several more months. Kudos are in order. I'm thinking of reviewing the PlayStation 4, personally. – Nicholas Deleon
Apple: Introducing iPhone
by Apple
iPhone combines three products — a revolutionary mobile phone, a widescreen iPod with touch controls, and a breakthrough Internet communications device with desktop-class email, web browsing, maps, and searching — into one small and lightweight handheld device. iPhone also introduces an entirely new user interface based on a large multi-touch display and pioneering new software, letting you control everything with just your fingers. So it ushers in an era of software power and sophistication never before seen in a mobile device, completely redefining what you can do on a mobile phone.
Widescreen iPod
iPhone is a widescreen iPod with touch controls that lets you enjoy all your content — including music, audiobooks, videos, TV shows, and movies — on a beautiful 3.5-inch widescreen display. It also lets you sync your content from the iTunes library on your PC or Mac. And then you can access it all with just the touch of a finger.
Music
Scroll through your songs, artists, albums, and playlists with just a flick of a finger. Album artwork is dramatically presented on the large display. And now use Cover Flow to browse your music library by album artwork for the first time on an iPod.
Revolutionary Phone
iPhone is a revolutionary new mobile phone that allows you to make a call by simply pointing your finger at a name or number in your address book, a favorites list, or a call log. It also automatically syncs all your contacts from a PC, Mac, or Internet service. And it lets you select and listen to voicemail messages in whatever order you want — just like email.
Receiving and making a call
With iPhone, making a call is as simple as touching a name or number. In addition, you can easily construct a favorites list for your most frequently made calls, and quickly merge calls together to create conference calls.
Breakthrough Internet Device
iPhone features a rich HTML email client and Safari — the most advanced web browser ever on a portable device — which automatically syncs bookmarks from your PC or Mac. Safari also includes built-in Google and Yahoo! search. iPhone is fully multi-tasking, so you can read a web page while downloading your email in the background over Wi-Fi or EDGE.
Safari Web Browser
With its advanced Safari browser, iPhone lets you see any web page the way it was designed to be seen, then easily zoom in by simply tapping on the multi-touch display with your finger.
High Technology
Multi-touch
iPhone features the most revolutionary user interface since the mouse. It's an entirely new interface based on a large multi-touch display and innovative new software that lets you control everything using only your fingers. So you can glide through albums with Cover Flow, flip through photos and email them with a touch, or zoom in and out on a section of a web page — all by simply using iPhone's multi-touch display.
iPhone combines three products — a revolutionary mobile phone, a widescreen iPod with touch controls, and a breakthrough Internet communications device with desktop-class email, web browsing, maps, and searching — into one small and lightweight handheld device. iPhone also introduces an entirely new user interface based on a large multi-touch display and pioneering new software, letting you control everything with just your fingers. So it ushers in an era of software power and sophistication never before seen in a mobile device, completely redefining what you can do on a mobile phone.
Widescreen iPod
iPhone is a widescreen iPod with touch controls that lets you enjoy all your content — including music, audiobooks, videos, TV shows, and movies — on a beautiful 3.5-inch widescreen display. It also lets you sync your content from the iTunes library on your PC or Mac. And then you can access it all with just the touch of a finger.
Music
Scroll through your songs, artists, albums, and playlists with just a flick of a finger. Album artwork is dramatically presented on the large display. And now use Cover Flow to browse your music library by album artwork for the first time on an iPod.
Revolutionary Phone
iPhone is a revolutionary new mobile phone that allows you to make a call by simply pointing your finger at a name or number in your address book, a favorites list, or a call log. It also automatically syncs all your contacts from a PC, Mac, or Internet service. And it lets you select and listen to voicemail messages in whatever order you want — just like email.
Receiving and making a call
With iPhone, making a call is as simple as touching a name or number. In addition, you can easily construct a favorites list for your most frequently made calls, and quickly merge calls together to create conference calls.
Breakthrough Internet Device
iPhone features a rich HTML email client and Safari — the most advanced web browser ever on a portable device — which automatically syncs bookmarks from your PC or Mac. Safari also includes built-in Google and Yahoo! search. iPhone is fully multi-tasking, so you can read a web page while downloading your email in the background over Wi-Fi or EDGE.
Safari Web Browser
With its advanced Safari browser, iPhone lets you see any web page the way it was designed to be seen, then easily zoom in by simply tapping on the multi-touch display with your finger.
High Technology
Multi-touch
iPhone features the most revolutionary user interface since the mouse. It's an entirely new interface based on a large multi-touch display and innovative new software that lets you control everything using only your fingers. So you can glide through albums with Cover Flow, flip through photos and email them with a touch, or zoom in and out on a section of a web page — all by simply using iPhone's multi-touch display.
Apple’s iPhone touch-screen – will it work as advertised?
What mobile devices have been missing is a touch-screen that “just works”. I use a Tablet PC with Vista loaded onto it, and love the functionality that a touch-screen interface delivers. But I wish it worked by finger touch, too. At least one model, from either Motion or Electrovaya has arrived with this capability, but it’s not something that everyone else has rushed to copy, which is a shame.
Touch-screen technology is available for consumer flat-screen TVs. Pioneer has a naturally transparent cover that fits over the top of their Plasma TVs that activates a touch screen capability when running the Windows Media Center OS, and is quite fun to use.
Touch screens on ATM machines always seem to work well, with no bad experiences immediately coming to mind, unlike the experiences of many PDA style smartphones. While it is quite easy to become proficient at using an interface with a stylus, many people instinctively use their finger with such phones, which doesn’t always work because of the size difference between a stylus and your fingertip.
Someone even invented a pointed tip that you could slip over your index finger to use way back in the Palm V days. But sadly they never really seemed to take off, otherwise everyone would be using them today.
High-end remote control manufacturers who have created expensive and highly advanced touch-screen models are reported to have found that users simply prefer buttons on this kind of device, in addition to some kind of screen to display information, simply because the tactile feedback in a remote control is a very handy thing – you can change channels, volume and take control without needing to look at the keypad to see which button you’re pressing.
Perhaps future touch screen displays, large and small, will have the ability to somehow create little bumps in different patterns on the screen, (be they squares, circles, triangles, little pyramids, semi spheres) with some kind of transparent nano-gel. That would give people the tactile feedback they want while enjoying the benefits of an infinitely re-programmable screen.
One report mentioned the iPhone has to be used with your bare finger – you can’t wear a glove and have it work. Given that gloves can come in different thicknesses, future touch screens may need incredibly accurate sensitivity to compensate for the bigger impact zone of a gloved finger, yet still actually work.
Also - how easy it is to enlarge button sizes on the iPhone screen for those whose eyesight might benefit from larger icons and larger text? This is probably already a feature, and if not, it could easily be programmed. It will be interesting to see how it would look. Larger buttons would also have larger impact zones, which may help some users.
While Steve Jobs’ demonstration of the iPhone at the Macworld keynote looked insanely simple to use, prompting me to think that the iPhone and its control system are something that even my mother could understand and start using within 5 minutes.
Apple's online iPhone demonstrations makes it look very easy, too. Actually they look like almost exact duplicates of what Steve Jobs was showing on stage. Reports of people having actually used an iPhone, including that of iTWire colleague Stan Beer have all been very favorable, although it has to be said virtually everyone that has tried it has only been granted a few minutes controlled access, with only a lucky few getting a few minutes more.
So what are some of the other questions we want answers to, and what happens if the iPhone doesn't deliver as expected? Read onto page 2 for the conclusion...
The questions we’d like answers to, such as will the screen get scratched and stop working, or become otherwise gummed up, is it harder to use without looking at it, does it need frequent recalibration, what happens if you accidentally drop your iPhone from table height onto the floor and plenty of others are yet to be answered, and for now, we just have to wait.
But surely Steve Jobs has thought of these issues – he has been through the 1st-generation iPod Nano screen scratch fiasco after all. Global reports of problems soon after or even on the day of general iPhone release won’t be fun for anyone.
If Apple really have delivered the world’s first truly useable touch-screen, a new generation of handheld devices will finally appear, as the rest of the world is spurred on to create devices as equally as easy to use, and hopefully better!
How good the LG Prada’s touch-screen will be is also yet to be determined, and it will be fascinating to compare them head-to-head, and then to see who else decides to deliver similar technology of their own.
Apple’s policy of vetting all third party content for the iPhone will hopefully guarantee that every third party app allowed for release (online sale and download for immediate installation) will have the same quality smooth touch interface that the rest of the iPhone has already displayed.
How successful Apple’s iPhone screen and touch interface ultimately ends up being, with the expectation that it will exceed expectations, a new standard – the next generation of human user interface design, in mobile devices anything else that can be controlled by touch screen – has finally been set.
People are looking at touch-screen technology in a new way, with the expectation that it should ‘just work’. There’s no stopping major progress and innovation in this area now, just like the innovation that’s running hot in renewable energy technologies, electric cars, Internet technologies and much more to come. From the standpoint of technology evolution, it’s a great time to be alive!
The prediction that we’ll see more technological innovation in the next 30 years than we’ve seen in the last 2000 looks like it will come true, as long as the world doesn’t destroy itself through war, environmental catastrophe, global economic meltdown, avian influenza pandemic or other doomsday scenario, which I hope that humanity is smart enough and or lucky enough to avoid, or at least avoid the doomsday aspect thereof. Humans always want a soft landing, although we don’t always get it.
The iPhone looks to being the first to truly deliver this ‘just works’ experience on an advanced mobile communicator, a bit like the ‘information pads’ or the PADD from Star Trek, but one that’s real, and not a TV show prop. Apple’s rumoured ‘Mac Tablet’ which was reported to be running on a similarly modified version of OS X and would have a larger screen could emulate the PADD concept even more.
If that’s the case, hopefully there’ll also be a Mac Tablet that combines the best of the iPhone interface with the ability to run existing Mac OS X apps, and one which could have touch-screen interfaces created for software like Photoshop, Office, iLife and any other software that wanted to implement it, no doubt according to strict Apple guidelines. Of your finger would serve as the mouse, but if needed, you could easily use a Bluetooth or USB keyboard and mouse for data entry and more precise mouse control.
But before all that, in theory, anyway, unless a Mac Tablet comes out at the same time to give Jobs the ultimate touch control lineup and the greatest worldwide publicity ever, comes the iPhone itself in June.
So what happens if the iPhone doesn’t revolutionize the touch screen interface and mobility as much as expected, despite the stunning interface we’ve all just seen? The iPhone 2 and future devices, whether from Apple or not, surely will. There’s no turning back now!
Touch-screen technology is available for consumer flat-screen TVs. Pioneer has a naturally transparent cover that fits over the top of their Plasma TVs that activates a touch screen capability when running the Windows Media Center OS, and is quite fun to use.
Touch screens on ATM machines always seem to work well, with no bad experiences immediately coming to mind, unlike the experiences of many PDA style smartphones. While it is quite easy to become proficient at using an interface with a stylus, many people instinctively use their finger with such phones, which doesn’t always work because of the size difference between a stylus and your fingertip.
Someone even invented a pointed tip that you could slip over your index finger to use way back in the Palm V days. But sadly they never really seemed to take off, otherwise everyone would be using them today.
High-end remote control manufacturers who have created expensive and highly advanced touch-screen models are reported to have found that users simply prefer buttons on this kind of device, in addition to some kind of screen to display information, simply because the tactile feedback in a remote control is a very handy thing – you can change channels, volume and take control without needing to look at the keypad to see which button you’re pressing.
Perhaps future touch screen displays, large and small, will have the ability to somehow create little bumps in different patterns on the screen, (be they squares, circles, triangles, little pyramids, semi spheres) with some kind of transparent nano-gel. That would give people the tactile feedback they want while enjoying the benefits of an infinitely re-programmable screen.
One report mentioned the iPhone has to be used with your bare finger – you can’t wear a glove and have it work. Given that gloves can come in different thicknesses, future touch screens may need incredibly accurate sensitivity to compensate for the bigger impact zone of a gloved finger, yet still actually work.
Also - how easy it is to enlarge button sizes on the iPhone screen for those whose eyesight might benefit from larger icons and larger text? This is probably already a feature, and if not, it could easily be programmed. It will be interesting to see how it would look. Larger buttons would also have larger impact zones, which may help some users.
While Steve Jobs’ demonstration of the iPhone at the Macworld keynote looked insanely simple to use, prompting me to think that the iPhone and its control system are something that even my mother could understand and start using within 5 minutes.
Apple's online iPhone demonstrations makes it look very easy, too. Actually they look like almost exact duplicates of what Steve Jobs was showing on stage. Reports of people having actually used an iPhone, including that of iTWire colleague Stan Beer have all been very favorable, although it has to be said virtually everyone that has tried it has only been granted a few minutes controlled access, with only a lucky few getting a few minutes more.
So what are some of the other questions we want answers to, and what happens if the iPhone doesn't deliver as expected? Read onto page 2 for the conclusion...
The questions we’d like answers to, such as will the screen get scratched and stop working, or become otherwise gummed up, is it harder to use without looking at it, does it need frequent recalibration, what happens if you accidentally drop your iPhone from table height onto the floor and plenty of others are yet to be answered, and for now, we just have to wait.
But surely Steve Jobs has thought of these issues – he has been through the 1st-generation iPod Nano screen scratch fiasco after all. Global reports of problems soon after or even on the day of general iPhone release won’t be fun for anyone.
If Apple really have delivered the world’s first truly useable touch-screen, a new generation of handheld devices will finally appear, as the rest of the world is spurred on to create devices as equally as easy to use, and hopefully better!
How good the LG Prada’s touch-screen will be is also yet to be determined, and it will be fascinating to compare them head-to-head, and then to see who else decides to deliver similar technology of their own.
Apple’s policy of vetting all third party content for the iPhone will hopefully guarantee that every third party app allowed for release (online sale and download for immediate installation) will have the same quality smooth touch interface that the rest of the iPhone has already displayed.
How successful Apple’s iPhone screen and touch interface ultimately ends up being, with the expectation that it will exceed expectations, a new standard – the next generation of human user interface design, in mobile devices anything else that can be controlled by touch screen – has finally been set.
People are looking at touch-screen technology in a new way, with the expectation that it should ‘just work’. There’s no stopping major progress and innovation in this area now, just like the innovation that’s running hot in renewable energy technologies, electric cars, Internet technologies and much more to come. From the standpoint of technology evolution, it’s a great time to be alive!
The prediction that we’ll see more technological innovation in the next 30 years than we’ve seen in the last 2000 looks like it will come true, as long as the world doesn’t destroy itself through war, environmental catastrophe, global economic meltdown, avian influenza pandemic or other doomsday scenario, which I hope that humanity is smart enough and or lucky enough to avoid, or at least avoid the doomsday aspect thereof. Humans always want a soft landing, although we don’t always get it.
The iPhone looks to being the first to truly deliver this ‘just works’ experience on an advanced mobile communicator, a bit like the ‘information pads’ or the PADD from Star Trek, but one that’s real, and not a TV show prop. Apple’s rumoured ‘Mac Tablet’ which was reported to be running on a similarly modified version of OS X and would have a larger screen could emulate the PADD concept even more.
If that’s the case, hopefully there’ll also be a Mac Tablet that combines the best of the iPhone interface with the ability to run existing Mac OS X apps, and one which could have touch-screen interfaces created for software like Photoshop, Office, iLife and any other software that wanted to implement it, no doubt according to strict Apple guidelines. Of your finger would serve as the mouse, but if needed, you could easily use a Bluetooth or USB keyboard and mouse for data entry and more precise mouse control.
But before all that, in theory, anyway, unless a Mac Tablet comes out at the same time to give Jobs the ultimate touch control lineup and the greatest worldwide publicity ever, comes the iPhone itself in June.
So what happens if the iPhone doesn’t revolutionize the touch screen interface and mobility as much as expected, despite the stunning interface we’ve all just seen? The iPhone 2 and future devices, whether from Apple or not, surely will. There’s no turning back now!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
