January 10th, 2007
Wow. Just ... Wow.
Current Mood: impressed
Other than co-opting yet another brand of iWank I don't see it as anything ground-breaking. Phones have had cameras in them for years now, my own *free when you sign up* model has front and back cameras and internet/email access. I know quite a few of the Nokias doubled as MP3 players too.
What's so impressive?
Yeah, honestly, I see nothing my Treo doesn't do (including color and touchscreen), possibly with the exception of looking slightly cooler. And that only slightly. Yet everyone is freaking out about it.
Well, that's the thing - until now I've been quite happy with a pretty basic phone - it makes calls, and it has a very basic organiser. Now, though, phones are reaching the point where I can see myself wanting one of the shiny ones with all those features, and the iPhone looks like a very nice interface for it all. Maybe it's just marketing getting to me in a weak moment ...
The thing is that it literally has nothing new that products half its price and less don't have. My Treo has an mp3 player, organizer, wifi, camera, the whole nine. It did not cost $600, not even close.
Actually it does have a couple of things that are rare or unique, but whether they are worth all that money? nah ...
... the google maps thing is great (but you should be able to do that on other phones, it's just software using existing stuff) and there's no built in GPS which would have been a brilliant combination.
... the horizontal/vertical sensor and causing the window to resize/rotate is in a number of digital cameras but very few phones (I think there's one or two Nokias that do it)
... the multitouch screen I haven't seen in a phone before (but I have seen in other devices before so I don't know how Steve Jobs can claim to have invented it!)
.. the scrolling album covers is a nice bit of UI (with them flipping over) but again, not worth spending the money on ...
... in many ways it's the Mercedes of the phone world ... a number of technologies made better and shiny, but in the end it's a very expensive car that does pretty much the same as the cheaper cars and will only sell to those with too much money or for whom style is worth spending extra on (and the pretentious!)
Though to be honest I'd at *least* wait until they release version 1.x because first releases are always buggy anyway.
Trademarked. By Cisco.
I doubt Apple's new gadget will be called "iPhone".
I'd imagine they're paying through their nose for it...
I'm guessing the main reason the Linksys one was released was so that they could go "but oh, no, we can't sell this trademark... we've already got products branded and on the shelves... it'll cost you^H^H^Hus looooots..."
It seems there is now more
to this story...
From this comment
's LJ (quoting in turn from CNN
), looks like it will :
There was some question as to whether Apple would be able to use the iPhone name for the device. But Cisco Systems (down $0.16 to $28.47, Charts), which owns the rights to the iPhone name, said Tuesday it expects to reach agreement with Apple later Tuesday on using the name for its device.
"Given Apple's numerous requests for permission to use Cisco's iPhone trademark over the past several years and our extensive discussions with them recently, it is our belief that with their announcement today Apple intends to agree to the final documents and public statement that were distributed to them last night and addressed a few remaining items," Cisco said in a statement obtained by CNN. "We expect to receive a signed agreement today."