Comments on: Now This Is A Social

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sun, 14 Jan 2007 21:25:11 +0000

“The other complaint I keep reading is that the iPhone doesn’t do Outlook/Exchange.”

It does, a slide shows “Rich HTML Email Any IMAP or POP3 email service” and later “IMAP” and “POP” columns, and under IMAP “Yahoo! Mail, MS Exchange, .Mac Mail” (1:03:14).

By: keso

keso — Thu, 11 Jan 2007 12:13:10 +0000

iPhone widgets are not so revolutionary as you might think. Nokia already has made something like it. Maybe not so beautiful as Apple's, but still. Nokia calls them Widsets. http://www.widsets.com

By: Lordmike

Lordmike — Thu, 11 Jan 2007 06:12:38 +0000

I will have to buy one if my wife allows it.

Just hope that the processor is better then oh HTC TyTn and Wizard with windows mobile 5 (great phones and such, but slow at times) and that you don’t have to press the screen like with many pocket PC’s I have had to just make sure the clock is right. I can’t use any of em for alarm clocks, because they wont sound the alarm or will just sound the alarm too late.

Never had that problem with Symbian OS on my Sony Ericsson P-series.

What I want is more then 64MB ROM, preferably 128 or 256MB and the RAM atleast 128, but 256MB wouldn’t be so bad.
I could go on for some time here.. so lets not.

I just want a lot from Apple, because that’s what I got when I went over to the light side and bought me a macbook pro last year. I miss certain games… but most Windows users don’t know what they’re missing out.

By: John Earnhardt

John Earnhardt — Thu, 11 Jan 2007 00:18:52 +0000

UPDATE ON CISCO’S iPHONE TRADEMARK – Intellectual property is the lifeblood of Silicon Valley and we all have to protect our property. As most know by now, the iPhone trademark is owned by Cisco. We (Cisco) had hoped to reach an agreement to share our trademark with Apple, yet they decided to use the name without our agreement, so we, unfortunately, are having to go to court to stop them from using the name. This is not about money. We still hope we can reach an agreement, but when your neighbor steals your property, you have no recourse other than to call the cops and file a complaint. Full Cisco statement at: http://newsroom.cisco.com/dlls/2007/corp_011007.html

By: “iPhone” Troubles at The Apple Blog

“iPhone” Troubles at The Apple Blog — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 23:29:21 +0000

[...] I asked earlier if anyone knew how Apple was using the iPhone name when it belongs to Cisco and their VOIP handset. Then I pointed to a ZDNet post that made it sound as if Apple and Cisco were working things out. Then just 12 minutes ago, this came up on Yahoo: Cisco Sues Apple Over User of iPhone Name [...]

By: arlingtonstuff

arlingtonstuff — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 22:08:13 +0000

iPhone. Am I missing something or is there some big hole in the iPhone hype? As far as I can see, there is no way to use the built-in Wi-Fi capability to stream or download podcasts, stream internet radio, etc!! What’s with that?

Imagine sitting in Starbucks (or whereever) and streaming via Wi-Fi on your iPhone KQED radio in San Francisco, or Paris radio? Or quickly downloading Democracy Now! from Pacifica to listen to. The way it is now you’d still have to do the work on your home PC and then transfer/sync it to the iPhone.

bummer.

By: kaiser

kaiser — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 20:35:27 +0000

Note that Apple say everywhere that the phone runs “OS X” not “Mac OS X” – Apple are generally very pedantic with their marketing terms – I’d say that it is definitely running a cut-down OS X, maybe even on a completely different kernel.
As for the Intel CPU – once again, it just doesn’t make sense to put an x86 CPU in it, it’s much more likely an ARM or something like that…

By: vanni

vanni — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 19:26:07 +0000

no one needs Outlook. It is so yesterday.

By: Javier

Javier — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 19:17:19 +0000

Someone posted that Cingular owned the right to use the name iPhone. Don’t know if this is true or not.

I agree 100% with the Leopard preview angle, and speculate that we won’t learn much more about the iPhone software until the next WWDC.

The other complaint I keep reading is that the iPhone doesn’t do Outlook/Exchange. Hey! that’s what Zune 2.0 is for. I imagine MS will sell more Zune 2.0 phones than Apple will sell iPhones. So what? I don’t need Outlook.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 19:12:03 +0000

Alex: Perhaps Apple and Cingular have a previous arrangement from the ROKR?

I’m wondering if Apple could have released it for all providers simultaneously. Verizon is notorious for turning off features manufacturers build into handsets, perhaps Cingular was the one that wanted to intentionally cripple the phone the least. Also carriers like exclusivity with new handsets.

I’ve heard a lot of people say “Cingular sucks!” but you know what-so does every other provider, it just depends on who you ask. Since the phone is (a) made by Apple and (b) sold through Apple Stores hopefully Apple will have some measure of control over customer service in that regard.

Price and carrier aside (my Sprint contract is up in December, giving me time to save up) I’m really, really curious to see how that touchscreen will hold up. When I bought my 5G iPod I also bought the Contour iSee hard case-I don’t know what could be available for the iPhone due to the touchscreen.

I’m hoping the price will drop around the holidays. I don’t know that the iPhone will be an out of the gate commercial success like the RAZR, but I do think as the price drops (and perhaps as they release stripped down “Nano” versions with other carriers) sales will really start to pick up.

By: REB

REB — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 18:07:01 +0000

It’s running OS X “Mobile” or some such moniker to be revealed, not Leopard. It doesn’t need a lot of what’s in OS X now, such as disk storage, printing, etc., etc.. I’m interested in what Intel chip is in it. Just as with games, Apple will control the intro of each Widget. Their iPhone developer’s kit will not be widely available in order to control the user experience. Apple has the rights to iPhone all around the world, outside of the U.S.. Cisco and Apple have been discussing this for years. Perhaps Apple will pay Cisco to attach their name in front of iPhone for their product(s) while Apple gets to use iPhone everywhere.

By: Alex Morse

Alex Morse — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 17:58:59 +0000

Partnering with a single provider was probably the stupidest thing apple could have done. They can’t guarantee quality of service, and since they’ve locked people in to cingular, that’s going to affect the iPhone’s success directly.

I expected it to be sold unlocked, maybe at a discount with one (or more,) providers. I was hoping against hope that they’d enter the market themselves like Virgin does so they could give good customer service.

Amazing device, but coupling it to one of the worst customer service industries that exists without having any control is a bad bad bad idea.

By: Grant (divigation)

Grant (divigation) — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 17:18:14 +0000

Nick, I agree with you on all accounts. As for how Apple named it iPhone (though I don’t know why) they purchased (or are purchasing) the rights from Cisco. The last I heard, the deal was supposed to be signed by Tuesday and you would think that they would make sure it was signed before the announcement. But it has been reported by the NY Times and some other sources that they negotiated a deal so that Apple could get the name from Cisco.

By: Richard Neal

Richard Neal — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 16:55:19 +0000

Leopard is unlikely to ship in June, because Steve already told us to expect a spring ’07 launch.