Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

3G iPhone Going Into Production In May

CmdrTaco posted more than 6 years ago | from the i-just-want-double-the-space dept.

Cellphones 269

A few folks noted the rumor mill churning over 3G iPhones coming soon. Apparently they might be going into production as early as May, and announced somewhere in the 2nd quarter. Hopefully they manage to stick a GPS and another 16 gigs of memory in this one.

cancel ×

269 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

why (1, Funny)

Chutulu (982382) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920048)

why so soon?

Re:why (5, Informative)

CockMonster (886033) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920066)

Because the iPhone was a flop outside North America.

Re:why (2)

Barny (103770) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920248)

Also note, that in countries where the telecommunications system is in a stranglehold by a company dedicated to obsolete standards (NextG anyone?), the few providers of 3G are the only usable cellular data method, there is not EDGE so...

Or as you said, if a flip flop saves a flop, well, meh.

I stick to my nokia (edge, 3g, gsm, 802.11g) I think :)

Re:why (5, Insightful)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920280)

Because the iPhone was a flop outside North America.
And you'll see a lot of comments from Apple fanboi's defending Apple all the way, but here's the truth, uncensored. (Go ahead, mod me down, fanboi trolls) what a lot of North American (like myself) readers don't seem to understand is that while we just got 3G services and phones rolled out within the last 2 years by the likes of Sprint, Verizon, etc., here in the States, abroad, they've had 3G for quite sometime and are completely spoiled by it. In the EU, any smartphone that's not 3G is immediately destined for failure, especially since they're already rolling out '3.5G' and '4G' in Europe, while we think 3G is the newest thing, Europe is already moving on.

Re:why (5, Insightful)

Bedemus (63252) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920388)

what a lot of North American (like myself) readers don't seem to understand is that while we just got 3G services and phones rolled out within the last 2 years by the likes of Sprint, Verizon, etc., here in the States, abroad, they've had 3G for quite sometime and are completely spoiled by it. In the EU, any smartphone that's not 3G is immediately destined for failure, especially since they're already rolling out '3.5G' and '4G' in Europe, while we think 3G is the newest thing, Europe is already moving on.
What a lot of North American readers (like yourself) don't seem to understand is that the population density in the countries where 3G coverage is widespread justifies that widespread deployment of 3G technology by giving companies a speedier return on their investment.

Such is the case for most of the connectivity technologies that see more rapid adoption overseas. There are large areas of the USA that are simply not densely populated enough to justify the expense of rolling out cutting-edge networks there. It isn't a matter of the US simply being behind the technological curve, as some like to assume.

Pardon the PHB nature of this next statement, but these are the types of differences that turn a 3 year ROI into a 10 year ROI, and slow down adoption.

Re:why (5, Informative)

Seahawk (70898) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920832)

So - what is the reason for not having 3G on the east and west coast of USA? I would guess the population density there is comparable to most of Europe.

And don't think we have 100% 3G coverage over here(Denmark) - far from it. I would guess by area we're around 40%(Complete guesstimate), but coverage by population is at least 80% - I see nothing that prevents USA from doing something similar.

Re:why (2, Informative)

Bedemus (63252) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920990)

Most providers do offer it in major metropolitan areas. AT&T Wireless, the carrier for the iPhone, for instance, shows their data coverage here [att.com] . A subset of these areas supports 3G, as shown here [att.com] . It's pretty easy to take a look at the data map, though, and get a feel for where there is population density that supports the rollout of the tech. If you go here [verizonwireless.com] you can see a similar coverage map for Verizon Wireless -- click "Broadband & V CAST" and look at the dark blue areas.

Re:why (2, Interesting)

dfghjk (711126) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920954)

"What a lot of North American readers (like yourself) don't seem to understand..."

I fail to see anything in the parent post that suggests that he doesn't understand. In fact, it's likely that he understands all too well. Perhaps rather than take an argumentative tone in response, you simply add your point to further reinforce the his.

Now, if such large areas in the US can't justify 3G then how could they justify WiFi as an alternative? That is, after all, the Apple position on the matter.

Re:why (1)

Moridineas (213502) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920682)

nd you'll see a lot of comments from Apple fanboi's defending Apple all the way, but here's the truth, uncensored. (Go ahead, mod me down, fanboi trolls) what a lot of North American (like myself) readers don't seem to understand is that while we just got 3G services and phones rolled out within the last 2 years by the likes of Sprint, Verizon, etc., here in the States, abroad, they've had 3G for quite sometime and are completely spoiled by it.
1) I completely agree that apple dropped the ball by not initially launching the iphone as 3G. I want one, but have been waiting for a 3G version.

2) What service are you using that only rolled out 3g "within the past 2 years." I have been hard pressed to find a date for when Verizon rolled out their ev-do network (circa 2003--5 years ago--seems roughly it), but I'd guess I've been using it for 3-4 years. Verizon/Sprint/etc just rolled out their RevA ev-do, if that's possibly what you are confused by?

Re:why (1)

toleraen (831634) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920860)

What service are you using that only rolled out 3g "within the past 2 years."
I can't speak for the GP, but AT&T just rolled out 3/3.5G into the Minneapolis/St Paul area 5 months ago, so it's been less than half a year for me. Tmo, as I understand it, has not rolled out any 3G in the States. Maybe listing the two major CDMA providers was just a bad example.

Re:why (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22921018)

What I really meant about 'rolling out' was 'mainstreamed'. 3G was really new 4 years ago, but now I think almost every phone product line sold by Sprint, for example, offers several EVDO ('SprintSpeed') compatible models.

Re:why (1)

houghi (78078) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920716)

Flop? It isn't on sale in Belgium. Other then that, you might be right. The reason might be that people in Europe are not realy surprised if they see a phone that can do some other things as well.

Re:why (4, Insightful)

MistaE (776169) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920162)

I don't think it is so soon. It's already almost been a year since the original came out.
 
This isn't Apple's other electronic markets, cell phones are updated almost the time, and usually it's not just a "slap a stick of bigger memory on it and call it a day" sort of revision. They need and should be adding more features to compete with the rest of the market.
 
With that said, I don't understand why the hell people keep begging for GPS, I just feel that there are so many other better self GPS only products that get the job done that Apple shouldn't bother with that market. Besides, if you're shelling out hundreds on an iPhone, I have a feeling you may have a GPS system of some sorts already.

Re: GPS (1)

IrrepressibleMonkey (1045046) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920270)

I took the introduction of the "location approximation" feature within the iPhone maps application to be an indication that Apple are thinking the same way as yourself. I think most people can live with the functionality as it is. I understand that GPS uses more battery power and I'd guess most of us already have it in our cars.
I'd be surprised if GPS was in the next revision.

Re: GPS (3, Interesting)

peragrin (659227) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920582)

the locate feature is absolutely useless to me. there aren't enough wi-fi access points to be any good.

Besides i don't want GPS built in. As GPS uses a ton a battery power. I want a Bluetooth, or other dongle that occasionally sends GPS data. Why can't I get a car dock, with a built in GPS receiver? Just plug the iPhone in I can listen to tunes, hook up the bluetooth to my car's bluetooth headset, and have driving map to go by all from one device.

Unfortunately the SDK, and Apple's EULA's prevent exactly that from ever happening.

Re: GPS (2, Informative)

IrrepressibleMonkey (1045046) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920654)

I don't have an iPhone, but according to the Apple FAQ:

How does the Maps location based service (LBS) work?
LBS provides your approximate location using information based on your proximity to known cellular network towers and Wi-Fi networks (when on and available). The more accurate the available information, the smaller the circle identifying your position on the map. The feature is not available in all areas. Known Wi-Fi networks are predominantly in urban areas. In order to provide your location, data is collected in a form that does not personally identify you. If you do not want such data collected, do not enable the feature. Not enabling the feature will not impact the functionality of your iPhone.


I'm assuming you have cell towers near you. Sure, when driving you'll need more accurate information than the LBS provides. But on foot, a map of the surrounding area should be good enough for most.

Re: GPS (1)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920774)

Most cell towers don't have accurate information - from your quote "the feature is not available in all areas"

Every time I've used it it's either said no data was available or drawn a huge circle around the city I'm in - that's completely useless.

Google maps versus GPS (1)

sjbe (173966) | more than 6 years ago | (#22921016)

I'm assuming you have cell towers near you. Sure, when driving you'll need more accurate information than the LBS provides. But on foot, a map of the surrounding area should be good enough for most.
It's certainly better than nothing but in my experience the cell phone triangulation is pretty bad at figuring out where you really are. When I use Google maps on my cell phone it's pretty rare that I'm even within a kilometer of where it thinks I am. Takes a lot of searching to find your actual location. And I'm in a major metro area with pretty good cell phone coverage flat terrain and no large buildings in the way. Even with Wifi assistance it's still often pretty imprecise. Maybe I'm just spoiled by having an actual GPS but I'm not terribly impressed by the maps service through google. For the price I can't complain though.

GPS via Bluetooth (1)

sjbe (173966) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920836)

Besides i don't want GPS built in. As GPS uses a ton a battery power. I want a Bluetooth, or other dongle that occasionally sends GPS data. Why can't I get a car dock, with a built in GPS receiver?
That's why I bought a Nokia E70 instead of an iPhone. This device [garmin.com] from Garmin might do what you are looking for. Other manufacturers make similar devices if you don't like that one. Not available for the iPhone yet though.

I would say though that if you are going the separate device route AND only going to use the GPS in the car, you might just consider getting a stand alone GPS. I have one for driving and it works brilliantly. Integration with my phone would be nifty but isn't really necessary if you just use it in the car. If you plan to use the GPS outside a car though I'm totally with you.

Re: GPS (2, Interesting)

Garabito (720521) | more than 6 years ago | (#22921050)

Besides i don't want GPS built in. As GPS uses a ton a battery power
Are you sure? GPS doesn't require the device to transmit anything.

Because we one "One gadget to rule them all" (5, Funny)

PortHaven (242123) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920286)

We're tired of...

"Three PDAs for the Elven Lords
Seven cell phones for the Dwarf Lords and their halls of stone
Nine MP3 players for the

Three Cell Phones for the Elven-kings under the sky,
Seven PDAs for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine MP3 players for Mortal Men doomed to die,

We want...

One Gadget the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
One Gadget to rule them all, One Gadget to find them,
One Gadget to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.

***

(ie: I don't want a separate cell phone, PDA, MP3 player, GPS and batman utility belt. Especially NOT when the technology is available to easily have all 4 in a single device. And the only thing stopping it from happening is BS marketing idiots.)

Why GPS on you cell phone. (4, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920380)

Because a GPS that network enabled is a great tool.
Traveling? Want to find a restaurant? Just use your cell with GPS and you can even dial the number and make reservations. Yes auto GPS systems have that but do you carry them in your pocket? When you travel you may or may not have a GPS in your rental car. Yea you could take your portable one with you but what if you don't have a rental car and are just walking? What if you are riding with someone that doesn't have a GPS?
Again it is always in my pocket. It is the same reason that I have web browser on my phone and a media player.
It is always with me and it is small and light.

Re:Why GPS on you cell phone. (1)

dotmax (642602) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920596)

i guess... it [let's find a restaurant!] speaks to what seems to me to be a pretty narrow market/lifestyle segment. Maybe for the itenerant road warrior type. For me, i know every decent restaurant within miles (west surburban chicagoland) or at least enough. ditto in Chicago. Heck, if i'm in chicago and i want a place to eat, i just need to walk no more than five minutes from any location i'm likely to be and i'll come upon a great place to eat. Seriously: how fucking pathetic are we that we can't find a place to eat without hundreds of dollars of electronics and 10 billion dollars of supporting infrastructure to guide us?

I am quite sincere in my criticism and question. I just don't get it. It seems immasculating and trivializing. It sounds a lot like the old "you can use your PC to store recipes!! And Balance your checkbook (online banking not having been invented)". Oooh, i know, it'll free us from ... looking out the window of our car!

Sorry, it sounds like feature-creeped bullshit. Of course, i am a luddite (with a macbook pro, who runs an atom smasher) on a bicycle most of the time.

GPS is incredibly useful (3, Interesting)

sjbe (173966) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920732)

it [let's find a restaurant!] speaks to what seems to me to be a pretty narrow market/lifestyle segment. Maybe for the itenerant road warrior type. For me, i know every decent restaurant within miles (west surburban chicagoland) or at least enough. ditto in Chicago.
You don't sound like someone who travels much. If you never leave the area where you live, no a GPS isn't going to help you much. But most of the population travels at least occasionally and some of us travel quite a lot. I have a Garmin nuvi [garmin.com] which I use all the time to find places to eat, hotels, parks, intersections, offices and of course for directions. I travel a fair bit (both work and pleasure) and a GPS is extremely useful when I do. I also just moved to a new city and it made it MUCH easier to learn my way around. If I could get the same features in my phone that would be even more useful. I never need directions anymore, just a destination address. It's great that you live in Chicago where there are wonderful options for dining all over the place. But I can tell you most of the country isn't like that. Even in Chicago it's often hard to find something if you don't know the city. (yes I've been there many times) Can you get by without a GPS? Of course. But just like you can get by without a computer it's still pretty handy if you have one available.

Re:Why GPS on you cell phone. (2)

pete-classic (75983) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920766)

You never meet up with friends at a place you don't know? Or change Doctors? Or have a job interview? Or an unexpected change of plans?

If the Yellow Pages, or whatever you're using, is doing the job for you that's great. But I don't see why you should pooh-pooh a tool that other people (such as myself) find so damn handy.

-Peter

Re:Why GPS on you cell phone. (1)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920896)

If you happen to live in the city you were born in (or have spent years in), and don't travel; then I can certainly see your point. If I still lived in New Orleans, I could get to any of 3 dozen excellent restaurants without a GPS, and possible after having been blinded in a horrible street car accident. I don't live in New Orleans anymore though, so i find my GPS occasionally useful for finding well hidden locations in my new town. Recently when I went to Houston for a few days on business I found it invaluable. It guided me to everything from the hotel to the great downtown restaurant a local suggested. Let me tell you... Houston is a mazed without help. I don't use my GPS daily, and possibly not even weekly, but it is well worth the couple of hundred bucks I spent on it.

Re:why (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22920504)

Why bother with GPS at all? In the UK, the small GPS units are only £30 and connect and work via Bluetooh fine. Why add the extra silicon for something thats not likely to be utilised by many? Also, is there even a TomTom clone, or will this rely on the (questionably accurate) Google maps etc?

Re:why (3, Insightful)

bit trollent (824666) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920590)

I do already have GPS but I really hope the next iPhone has it and is available soon. If the first version had GPS I would already own an iPhone and I probably wouldn't have a normal suction cup GPS. I would instead be suction cupping my iPhone to the windshield.

Now that I have a good car GPS system to save me from getting lost all the time, I want one in my pocket. I can think of a few times when I have been out in a city on foot, and had to worry about getting lost. It would have been nice to have GPS in my pocket whith the confidence that I would never get lost again. Knowing that you will never get lost makes you free to explore. This is as true in a car as on foot.

I think the main reason that the iPhone doesn't have GPS is that it is a tough feature to really get right. All the GPS systems I have owned have had their flaws. I can understand why you wouldn't want to introduce all that complexity and accompanying scrutiny when you are trying to get an already compelling (to some people) product out the door. I'm still basing my next cell phone purchase on GPS capabilities.

getting lost (1)

dotmax (642602) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920666)

It seems to me, barring a few specific places, that it takes an act of will to get lost in a modern city. Again, we're integrateing hundreds of dollars of technology with a multibillion dollar supporting infrastructure to replace a FOLDED PAPER MAP that we might need to use for TWO MINUTES EVERY THREE YEARS. This statement will be true for 90%+ of all pedestrians and drivers.

Society of idiot feckless pussies. We are that.

Re:getting lost (1)

bit trollent (824666) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920760)

So you know how to get from 2500 Bumblefuck Dr to 234 Martin Luther King Blvd?

No? Well that's ok because you have a big ass folded map in your pocket.

GPS is the next wave of integration (2, Insightful)

sjbe (173966) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920624)

With that said, I don't understand why the hell people keep begging for GPS...
Because GPS is a VERY logical addition to a mobile device. Arguably more logical than a music player for many people. Any business traveler would likely find a GPS enabled phone (with appropriate navigation software) to be extremely useful. I think the GPS is the next logical device to see serious integration into smartphones (after PDAs and MP3 players) because it is such an obvious fit for mobile users.

I have a Garmin nuvi 660 and a Nokia E70. Both are fine devices. But there are MANY times when carrying my GPS is impractical (basically anytime I'm not in a car) and having a phone with even a subset of the Garmin's abilities would be handy. I can do the google maps thing same as the iPhone, but it is not very useful especially compared with a real GPS. Personally I don't listen to much music but a GPS built in to my cell phone (again, with appropriate navigation software) would be a huge win for me. One of the reasons I did not buy an iPhone was because it didn't have any built in GPS capabilities and I found a way [garmin.com] to get my Nokia to integrate (via bluetooth) with a compact GPS. Not a perfect solution but a good one. Should the iPhone get some good GPS capabilities that would make it a LOT more attractive to me.

Re:GPS is the next wave of integration (1)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920804)

The problem with GPS is the battery drain.. if you run it all the time expect your battery to die in a couple of hours.

It's great for in-car use where it's on power, but unless apple have found a GPS chipset that is able to work on much lower power than the current ones I wouldn't expect it in an iphone in the near future.

External GPS works - where you have a separate battery and you plug it into USB. Then when the GPS dies at least you've still got your phone. That would mean apple enabling the USB port on the phone though..

Re:GPS is the next wave of integration (1)

sjbe (173966) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920892)

It's great for in-car use where it's on power, but unless apple have found a GPS chipset that is able to work on much lower power than the current ones I wouldn't expect it in an iphone in the near future.
No argument on the battery drain, though generally if I'm outside a car I generally don't need the GPS to be active for many hours in a row. If I did I probably would be carrying a dedicated GPS device anyway. One specially designed for hiking or whatever else I'm doing at that time. I think an integrated device would work if you could easily turn the GPS functions off when not in use.

Re:why (2, Interesting)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920966)

Maybe that's the problem with the cell phone market. Too many new "features."

My girlfriend just got a new phone to replace her two year old one that broke. The new one is almost imperceptibly smaller, the camera is slightly higher resolution, and the default ringtone is more annoying and more difficult to change.

Apple has done very well by resisting the urge to cram more "features" into their devices. Most famously, the iPod.

Re:why (1)

dfghjk (711126) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920986)

"With that said, I don't understand why the hell people keep begging for GPS, I just feel that there are so many other better self GPS only products that get the job done that Apple shouldn't bother with that market."

Really? You are having trouble grasping the concept of integration? You see no value in having only one device in your pocket instead of two? A GPS unit you have with you will always be better than one you don't have.

As for battery life, GPS only consumes power when it is on. I'm amazed how people don't bother to think before commenting.

Re:why (1)

kextyn (961845) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920192)

Why so late? It's an iPhone, one of the most expensive phones on the market. I would expect to get 3G if I'm paying that much for a phone regardless of market penetration.

Re:why (1)

Chutulu (982382) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920234)

i was being ironic.... i have a 3G phone for 2 years now and it cost me 175 euros.

Re:why (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920226)

Strangely I was thinking the opposite - why so late?

(And really - do we have a Slashdot story for every 3G phone that comes out? I had to double-check my calendar to make sure I hadn't slipped five years or more into the past. Maybe we can have news stories about other new fangled technologies like texting, MMS and Java?)

Re:why (1)

cbart387 (1192883) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920288)

Because Apple is just that good. I mean, who cares that both Fedora and Ubuntu have a new version coming out in April. Obviously, just the fact that Apple's going into production in May is news!!! Whoops, did I show my bias?

Re:why (1)

peragrin (659227) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920606)

when fedora and Ubuntu comes out they too will get posted.

other than that Apple makes great random filler for the editors that always generate ad pageviews.

Re:why (1)

cbart387 (1192883) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920742)

from here [appleinsider.com]

In his message to investors, financial analyst Scott Craig points to channel investigations which show an iPhone capable of faster, third-generation cellular Internet access produced in small numbers in May, with a larger number surfacing in June as Apple prepares a formal rollout for the new device.
My point was (and maybe I wasn't clear) is this is not even full production. I read the above (with emphasis by me) as this being simply a 'beta like rollout' with the full production in the fall. Fedora/Ubuntu's beta is currently running now and their formal rollout is less than a month away. So we get news about a device which will likely be fully rolled out in 5 months instead of a two very nerdy releases that will occur in a couple weeks. Wouldn't it be more nerd news to know how these distros are progressing in their betas. Yes I know I can look myself but we're talking about the point of slashdot. News for nerds. Stuff that matters

other than that Apple makes great random filler for the editors that always generate ad pageviews.
So, I think you're right unfortunately. Even more unfortunate, I'm contributing to the pageviews.

Re:why (1)

Koutarou (38114) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920314)

Among other reasons, because the iPhone is useless in non-GSM countries like Japan.

Don't take away my storage, captain! (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22920118)

A few folks noted the rumor mill churning over 3G iPhones coming soon.

But my iPhone already has 8 gigs!

Will it have a Paris Hilton news blocker? (5, Funny)

Big Frank (921537) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920144)

If it did, I'd buy it at any cost!

Re:Will it have a Paris Hilton news blocker? (3, Interesting)

Satan Dumpling (656239) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920292)

I just want ads blocked on my iphone. I tried editing the hosts file on my iphone, but it didn't work. Any suggestions? I need a solution on the iphone itself that will work anywhere.

Why does iPhone succeed? (1, Flamebait)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920150)

I was thinking about this the other day. Why does the iPhone "succeed"? It is essentially a rehash of a Treo. Sure, it has a nicer interface, but is that it?

Re:Why does iPhone succeed? (-1, Flamebait)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920178)

because it has a huge marketing push behind it and a legion of idiots ready to gobble up every drop of vomit from steve jobs mouth.

Re:Why does iPhone succeed? (5, Insightful)

MistaE (776169) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920190)

Never underestimate the power of the 'coolness' factor. Also, you write off the nicer interface as if its somewhat insignificant. That's the CORE component of any consumer electronic market. The public is going to interact with the most part through the interface, if it sucks, they're not going to spend the time to learn it.

Like it or hate it, you got to admit that the iPhone has a pretty nice interface and it's not too hard to learn. When my mom and aunts, who are in their 40s and not very technologically adept, decided to pick up iPhones and can use them as well as me, you know they're doing something right.

Re:Why does iPhone succeed? (4, Insightful)

ironwill96 (736883) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920252)

It all boils down to this: what the iPhone does it does well.

I have used other smart phones such as the Motorola Q and the Blackberry, but the iPhone is the simplest to use for what I want: easy to access and read e-mail and web browsing and a phone. It also does simple things like work as my calculator, a calendaring system, take notes on it, do alarms, stop-watch, stock quotes, weather and whatever else you download for it now. And oh yeah, it is my iPod too and I synch it with Bluetooth to my car for use as hands-free.

As someone else already pointed out, the ease of use and interface are the key things that a good smartphone really needs - and Apple succeeded quite well with their first try. Yes, it didn't have 3G or GPS built-in for the first pass at it, but future versions most certainly will. Once they add the rest of those features, i'll be surprised at what people will find to complain about it then. It will probably never have enough memory for the complainers and i'm sure the DRM and device lock-down are also something to continue to complain about, but i'm happy with the phone now just as much (or more than) I was when I bought mine back in September after they lowered the price on it. Now if only AT&T could get some better coverage around where I live :-)

Re:Why does iPhone succeed? (4, Insightful)

Admiral Ag (829695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920404)

The iPhone could be equipped with a perpetual motion machine and a love ray that instantly seduces any woman it is aimed at, and some people would still complain that it doesn't support MMS, and thus they would rather have their free flip phone.

Don't underestimate the power of the dark side.

Re:Why does iPhone succeed? (1, Funny)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920528)

The iPhone could be equipped with a perpetual motion machine and a love ray that instantly seduces any woman it is aimed at, and some people would still complain that it doesn't support MMS, and thus they would rather have their free flip phone.

Unlikely. But if the free flip phones had a perpetual motion machine and a love ray that instantly seduces any woman it is aimed at, some people would still rather have their expensive Iphone, and that's still all we'd hear about on Slashdot.

But since neither is true, that's irrelevant.

(Can you give me some unique features of the Iphone - features that you bought it for - or can you only give me things which are as real as perpetual motion machines?)

Re:Why does iPhone succeed? (4, Interesting)

Pretor (2506) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920976)

I'll give you several

1: Ease of use.
2: High quality software - few software bugs
3: Ipod
4: Very good web browser
5: Some very nice third party software (if you jailbrake it)

I've also have a Nokia E90 - so I'm able to compare my iPhone to a more feature full phone. This is a phone that has almost all the features that you could imagine. 3.5G, GPS, SIP client, multi megapixel camera, keyboard and etc. This is similar to other expensive Nokia phones.

The problems with the Nokia phones are:

1. Several different confusing menus - the series 60 is awful to use
2. Lots and lots of bugs, several that freezes the phones
3. Terrible multimedia software
4: Good web browser with bad user interface. Nokia calls it Safari (webkit) based, but the interface is miles away from the iPhone

Yes my Nokia E90 has it bright spots. For example I bring it along on my travels because of it's GPS and its SIP client. Additionally the keyboard makes it nice using ssh to check problems with servers and etc. And it's really nice to have 3.5G Internet access. But since it's awful to use as a day to day phone it's mostly left at home.

BTW: I live in Oslo, the main capital of Norway. An area with very good 3G and 3.5G coverage. So I know what I'm missing with just the EDGE network.

Re:Why does iPhone succeed? (1)

dfghjk (711126) | more than 6 years ago | (#22921064)

"Don't underestimate the power of the dark side."

By the dark side you're referring to that force that's is causing your ridiculous whining, right?

How does the world's greatest multimedia phone do without supporting the oldest and most basic multimedia functionality again? Is MMS really that hard for Apple?

Re:Why does iPhone succeed? (4, Insightful)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920262)

The other reply got modded flamebait, but the spirit of the answer was correct - consider how it's not just marketing from Apple themselves, but from phone shops that promote it, and news media from Slashdot to the BBC. What's this - a news article not about the release of Iphone, but simply a new version supporting a feature that's long been a standard? Most phones don't get a story at all.

Apple appear to be taking advantage that many people are unaware how almost every phone (even cheap ones) can do Internet access as standard, so they are able to promote it as a new and wonderful thing (even on Slashdot, I see this happening).

(And it's not clear it has "succeeded" apart from in the sense of not flopping? Sure it's succeeded, but so has the Treo and many other phones, but if you mean been a success above all others, that's not clear at all to me.)

Re:Why does iPhone succeed? (5, Insightful)

teh kurisu (701097) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920482)

Apple appear to be taking advantage that many people are unaware how almost every phone (even cheap ones) can do Internet access as standard, so they are able to promote it as a new and wonderful thing (even on Slashdot, I see this happening).

I'm sure they're also attracting the people that have tried out the browsers on their phones, and found them so painful to use that they've just given up. I'm one of them - I never use the browser on my Samsung Z560 unless I really have to. In contrast, I'll browse the web on my iPod Touch quite happily - it's not as good as a desktop browser, but it's not that far off.

In fact, I was ranting to my boss just now about the fact that my phone browser forgets cookies when the browser is closed (which happens every time you close the clamshell, annoyingly). It's particularly apparent when using PayPal Mobile, which shows you a regular login page by default. You can opt to log in using your mobile number and a PIN, and if you've got the cookie you'll be automatically redirected. Mine, unfortunately, forgets the cookie.

Re:Why does iPhone succeed? (2, Interesting)

darkwhite (139802) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920414)

The interface is just about all that matters in a cell phone. I am sick and tired of cell phones with user interfaces that SUCK. The iPhone has a pioneering full-surface touchscreen display just like I envisioned. It rolls a great mp3 player in. It's thin enough to fit in a jeans pocket without anyone noticing, thinner than most phones. Those are all killer features. Smartphones? Barf. A rehash of Treo? Get out of here.

I'll definitely be getting a 2nd gen...

** Because it's sexy...and cool (2, Insightful)

scuba_steve_1 (849912) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920992)

Why do iPods outsell other MP3 players? You can tout their UI or iTunes, but I honestly believe it comes down to the fact that they look cool and, perhaps more importantly, many folks who buy them are trying to also make a fashion (or cultural) statement. No longer does one need to have an opinion on individual issues...or evaluate the superiority of a specific product. No...all you need to do is grab a brand and slap it on your forehead.

Someone mentioned that the iPhone is essentially a sexed-up Treo. As a long-time Treo owner, I very much disagree. It isn't even close to a Treo...at least in terms of functionality.

I love my Treo. Is the PalmOS dead? Almost certainly. Is the Treo hardware innovative? Not anymore. Not even close. So why do I prefer the Treo over an iPhone? Countless reasons, 3G and multiple carriers aside (and those are fairly large issues to set aside).

Start with the fact that I can install whatever software I want on my Treo...and do - MP3 players, streaming internet radio players, video players (and recorders), a JVM, games, eBook readers, an RPN calculator, PDF readers, DocsToGo to both view AND create Microsoft Office documents, third-party phone dialers, third-party web browsers and email clients, third-party IM clients...whatever I want...and they are not AJAX applications. They are rich client-side applications with access to the full range of phone functionality.

Memory is another issue. How much RAM does an iPhone have? My Treo? It has infinite storage...since it accepts SD cards. I just came back from vacation...and I brought about 30 hours of video, including full length movies and content from my TiVo. I also brought several thousand MP3s and hundreds of eBooks. SD cards are dirt cheap and extremely portable...and essentially allow you to have infinite storage on the go...and obviate the need to upgrade every time that you have gigabyte lust.

Is the Treo UI sexy? Hell no. Sure, you can change it in many ways with third-party applications, but in general, the iPhone kills it in this regard...but the UI is also very FUNCTIONAL. I can enter an appointment in one click, have a global find function, can cut and paste, can search for a contact by typing a few letters and have it match either first name, last name, occupation, or company (using TakePhone). I can delete (or mark read) multiple email messages at once. I have a real keyboard with tactile feedback and ten other fully programmable hard buttons...and a D-pad. I have utility applications that can change phone behavior in almost anyway - how lights flash for various events, when the phone rings, how it rings (for example, different ring tones for different people...or times of day). I even have a utility that allows me to send a specific SMS to the phone and have it perform any one of a number of functions, include lock, wipe memory, or wipe memory and SD card. The real issue is that the platform is OPEN for development. Applications developed with the iPhone SDK will be crippled...and will have to live in tightly defined sandbox.

Oh well, Palm is all but dead...but that doesn't make my 3G Treo any less valuable...at least until something better comes along. I will admit, the iPhone's 320x480 screen (50% larger than my Treo's 320x320 screen) looks AWESOME...and I would love to have it. Safari also beats the pants off of Blazer and Opera Mini...and WiFi would be killer in certain situations. Thus, I am keeping a very close eye on the next iPhone...and developments in the iPhone SDK world...as I am with Android. I seriously doubt my next phone will be Palm-based...and I am no longer on contract so I am ready to jump platforms...but I have just not seen the compelling reason yet.

Your mileage may vary.

BTW, whatever phone you have, this software is an excellent way to get video on to it - http://www.pqdvd.com./ [www.pqdvd.com] I am not affiliated with them in any way. I am just a very happy customer.

cheers,
Steve

Re:Why does iPhone succeed? (3, Insightful)

dfghjk (711126) | more than 6 years ago | (#22921022)

The Treo did succeed and it would be more successful now if its software wasn't of such poor quality. The iPhone does many things better than the Treo even ignoring the Treo's stability problems.

The Treo concept remains a desirable one so you answered your own question. The company that does the best job with this type of device will succeed. Right now it is Apple (among others).

Re:Why does iPhone succeed? (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 6 years ago | (#22921024)

Yes. I mean really, every computer today is just a rehash of an IBM PC or an Apple II with a nicer interface, right? And THOSE are just rehashes of Vaxes in a nicer box, yes?

I know a guy whose work got him a Blackberry. He was showing it to me, complained a bit about how the interface was a bit difficult. When he saw my iPod Touch he went out and bought himself an iPhone, pre-hacked to work in Canada. He's middle aged, not really subject to the coolness factor.

Re:Why does iPhone succeed? (2, Insightful)

linuxpng (314861) | more than 6 years ago | (#22921042)

as a former treo 700p user it's because.....

you don't have to reboot it 5 times a day and it doesn't have interface lag switching between networks.
Oh the web browser is actually useable.

Should change name (0, Troll)

ArAgost (853804) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920154)

Is this rumors for nerds?

Re:Should change name (-1, Troll)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920184)

Perhaps you don't mean it in that way, but your comment is very prejudicial against gay nerds. While it might be funny to poke fun at nerd culture by saying that they never leave their basement and never had sex with real girls, there are actually homosexual nerds who would be interested in the latest Apple iPhone.

Just because this news doesn't fit into your worldview of "nerd culture", it doesn't mean that there aren't different aspects of nerd culture that aren't just as valid as your little slice of nerddom.

Re:Should change name (1)

ArAgost (853804) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920332)

I do already have three fruit-company-branded computers lying around the house, so gay tech interests me - I'm not gay, so I must be a designer/artist/typography guy/musician. The point is that a 3G iPhone is being rumored since the announcement of the first iphone, and his Steveness himself said in january 07 that 3g was in the plans. This is still by no means news, although I agree that it is likely to happen soon, so I find it an item more for macrumors or appleinsider.

day early? (3, Funny)

Tom (822) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920204)

Isn't this a day early?

Re:day early? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22920228)

>> Isn't this a day early? and a dollar long

You should take a clue from Apple (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920506)

Isn't this a day early?
...and not present future events. Takes all the fun out of them.

Here's an idea for Apple... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22920210)

Include STEREO Bluetooth (A2DP) ... I still don't get why this was left out of the original.

Re:Here's an idea for Apple... (1)

empaler (130732) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920400)

Most reviews of A2DP that I've seen mention words like "buggy" or "unreliable". I'd bet that it is relevant for Apple's decision.

Re:Here's an idea for Apple... (1)

dfghjk (711126) | more than 6 years ago | (#22921106)

Wouldn't that be an opportunity for Apple? Are they really that dependent on others to fix the bugs first? Can't Apple do their own bluetooth software AND the headset to match?

I thought Apple was innovative. The only thing innovative is people's excuses.

They also should add... (1, Troll)

Tastecicles (1153671) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920294)

stereo Bluetooth /and/ standard 3.5mm jack
Camera (at least 5MP)
Mini4 USB2.0 w/MSD capability
extended capacity battery or the ability to plug-in portable power (Power Monkey via usb?)
voice recording
DAB radio, or at the very least, FM
Expandable memory via microSD

Why the original iphone didn't get all these features I'll never know, and if the next gen doesn't get it I'll not bother; I'll be sticking with my Sagem My401c.

Re:They also should add... (2, Insightful)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920370)

Why the original iphone didn't get all these features I'll never know

Cost. The thing is already $400-$500. Imagine if you added all of those "features"...

Re:They also should add... (1)

toleraen (831634) | more than 6 years ago | (#22921144)

You're kidding right? The AT&T Tilt has: Stereo Bluetooth, 3 MP camera (with video recording), Mini4 USB 2.0, extended capacity battery, voice recording, and microSD, and I can pick one up for $300. Refurbed for $150.

Re:They also should add... (2, Insightful)

T-Bone-T (1048702) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920372)

Why would you want a standard 3.5mm headphone jack? You wouldn't be able to take calls on the earphones. The jack still works for regular headphones already, so what's the problem.

Re:They also should add... (1)

nosaj72 (615582) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920728)

The jack is recessed so that the majority of headphones wont physically fit into it, including Apples standard iPod headphones. You can get an adapter, which is basically an extender, but why??

Re:They also should add... (2, Insightful)

T-Bone-T (1048702) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920828)

That sounds like a physical problem, not a standards problem unless a standard 3.5mm jack is required to have a certain amount of space around it.

Re:They also should add... (1)

keytohwy (975131) | more than 6 years ago | (#22921060)

That's just it. I think this has been commented on by Apple when the iPhone was released. Given the internal mechanics, it wasn't possible to put the jack closer to the edge.

Re:They also should add... (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 6 years ago | (#22921086)

You can get an adapter, which is basically an extender, but why??

Or, you can peel back the rubber sleeve on the iPod buds and it fits nicely. But yeah, Steve. Nice try. Next time quit obsessing about a extra millimeter of space and make the area around the jack just a tiny bit bigger.

Re:They also should add... (1)

dfghjk (711126) | more than 6 years ago | (#22921132)

The problem is with the jack shielding that prevents virtually all existing headphone plugs from being used. Everyone knows that except apparently you.

Using standard headphones is something that a lot of people would think natural for the world's greatest iPod. Not that many people care about taking phone calls while listening to music. That's for the excuse though.

Re:They also should add... (2, Interesting)

MtViewGuy (197597) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920392)

Given your suggestions, I think we'll see the following on the 2G Apple iPhone:

1) 3G high-speed data download support through HSDPA (which AT&T is implementing in major metropolitan areas).
2) Maximum flash memory increased to 32 GB, the same as the top-line iPod Touch.
3) Improved onboard camera with 4-5 megapixel capability.
4) Bigger capacity battery (though this will increase the thickness of the iPhone about 2-3 mm).
5) Improved transceiving antenna, very necessary for HSDPA connections.
6) Optional software GPS support, using software sold through iTunes Music Store.

Re:They also should add... (1)

-noefordeg- (697342) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920396)

Well... Those options could be added after they make the iPhone useful =/
-Yes! I do have one 16GB iPhone right here... But it's still not as useful as an old SonyEricsson 810 I also have (right here).

Options I would like to see added:
-being able to be -EASILY- used as a modem for a portable computer via USB/BlueTooth (especially with the added 3G support)
-register as USB portable unit in Finder / Explorer
-drag & drop files to the unit from USB / BlueTooth
-same functionality as my iPod. Play music from iTunes on any computer you connect the iPhone too.
-drag music from any iTunes to the iPhone
-send / receive MMS
-use address book on my computers to send SMS / MMS from the iPhone using BlueTooth (I CAN do this with my SE 810)
-save e-mail attachments to iPhone's disk
-just be user friendly... For the last 5 years all my phones could easily use any mp3-file as ring tone. iPhone?!

iPhone -could- have been SO great, instead it's just "ok".

Re:They also should add... (1)

The Only Druid (587299) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920644)

"-being able to be -EASILY- used as a modem for a portable computer via USB/BlueTooth (especially with the added 3G support)"

So, you want to be able to tether it, taking advantage of the free broadband, despite the fact that they sell that feature for other devices at an entirely different price structure? Not familiar with the issue users have had with this plan on every other carrier?

"-same functionality as my iPod. Play music from iTunes on any computer you connect the iPhone too."

Your grammar here makes it impossible to tell exactly what you mean; are you suggesting that any computer should be able to read the iPhone, such that the computer's install of iTunes would be able to play the iPhone's contents' as a normal library source?

"-drag music from any iTunes to the iPhone"

You're asking for the ability to - contrary to the rules with all iPods - be synchronized with more than one library?

""

Re:They also should add... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22920452)

Noted. All these, and more, will go in the new model.

The cost will be $2549 at launch.

Re:They also should add... (1)

dfghjk (711126) | more than 6 years ago | (#22921156)

Considering all the features he listed are software, just why would Apple have to charge so much when their competitors are able to deliver many of these now without upcharge?

Re:They also should add... (1)

dfghjk (711126) | more than 6 years ago | (#22921170)

Sorry, thought you were replying to a different post (which was all software features).

Re:They also should add... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22920588)

I expect the camera will be upped to 5MP as that will be the standard this year. There might be a second VGA camera on the front for video calls as well, as with many 3G phones on the market currently.

Don't existing iPod battery boosters work with the iPhone? They all use the same dock connector.

DAB radio is dead, and rubbish quality to boot, and something about them must be expensive because they're not that cheap still.

Voice recording should have been there, I'd expect it to come as a software update.

There should be bluetooth modem support.

WishList (2, Interesting)

pinkocommie (696223) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920322)

  1. AutoFocus/Flash for the Camera
  2. 3G
  3. GPS
and I'm set, getting rid of a bunch of electronics for just one device :D
What else do you guys think could be added?

Re:WishList (2, Insightful)

Kostya (1146) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920486)

I'm with you on the camera. My iPhone has become my primary camera just because it's always with me--even though the quality sucks. If they could boost the resolution, get the focus and color quality a little better, add a flash--all of that would be really nice. What I would really dig is if you could shoot quicktime with it. All of my point-n-shoot digital cameras shot video in quicktime. I'm really surprised the iPhone doesn't shoot any kind of video (even the little 15-30 second clips).

I know everyone complains about EDGE, but I hope the 3G layers on top of the EDGE support. You can get EDGE just about anywhere--even if it is dog slow. Sometimes that's really handy.

For me, more memory and a better camera would be my main selling points. I want fast access, but I usually make do with EDGE. I suppose I'd change my mind if I saw what 3G could be like on an iPhone ;-)

Re:WishList (2, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920942)

I know everyone complains about EDGE, but I hope the 3G layers on top of the EDGE support. You can get EDGE just about anywhere--even if it is dog slow. Sometimes that's really handy.
Maybe in the USA, but not elsewhere. Most of Europe skipped EDGE and went straight to UMTS and is now moving to HSDPA. In the UK, O2 (who got the exclusive deal for the iPhone) quickly rushed out EDGE in London, but not anywhere else, meaning that the iPhone has to fall back to GPRS in most of the country. My current phone support UMTS and the network has pretty good coverage - I only occasionally have to fall back to using GPRS, and I really notice the different (50KB/s downloads with 200ms ping times become 2-5KB/s downloads with 2s ping times). My next phone will probably support HSDPA, jumping the speed up and the latency down another order of magnitude.

Much of the benefit of a decent connection is lost with an iPhone though, since you can't use it tethered. When I'm travelling, I keep my phone in my pocket and use it via bluetooth from my laptop or Nokia 770. The horrendously crippled bluetooth stack on the iPhone doesn't support this, however.

16GB _exta_ memory? (1)

IBBoard (1128019) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920354)

With that much extra memory on top of how much it already has it'll have way more memory than my desktop machine (8x or more). They're not trying to make the iPhone interesting for Microsoft developers and adding a version of Boot Camp to it, are they? Even with 16GB+ I'm not sure I'd want to try and run Vista on an iPhone.

Re:16GB _exta_ memory? (1)

daveime (1253762) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920454)

Nope, they just want to make sure it will run Firefox ;-) *Ducks head to avoid the moderators points shot like flaming arrows*

Re:16GB _exta_ memory? (1)

sxeraverx (962068) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920710)

That's +16GB Flash ROM, not +16GB SRAM (or DRAM? I'm not sure which the iPhone uses). They're both called memory, but using a Flash ROM as your main memory, no matter how much of it you had, well, you just plain wouldn't want to do it. Imagine Vista on 1MB of RAM. Unless my irony detector is broken, in which case you already knew that.

Re:16GB _exta_ memory? (1)

IBBoard (1128019) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920754)

I assumed it meant storage, but had never paid much attention to Flash being ROM. It was meant as irony, but more in the "memory? don't you mean storage" way of the usual mis-usage (e.g. my parents and grandparents using them interchangeably)

Sh17 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22920456)

8Ass of them all,

FCC approval ? (2, Insightful)

Builder (103701) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920662)

Has anyone seen an FCC approval filing for this yet ?

Surely since they had to pre-announce the first iPhone to protect against the FCC announcing it for them, we could expect to see a similar request before a 3G iPhone comes into being ?

3G not when I'm in the middle of nowhere (0)

stokessd (89903) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920704)

I'm one of the people who doesn't live in a congested city here in the US, so my expectations of actual 3G connectivity are pretty low. So until the network gets built out to the point that I have hope of 3G other things drive my excitement about future iPhone developments. Like:

- Sending and receinging MMS messages (where's the friggin pictures?!)
- A native calculator that doesn't suck (RPN please)
- Notes and to-do's that sync with my computer
- an instant messaging client (Apple have you heard of this program called iChat?)
- Flash support so I can finally have the real internet in my pocket (contrary to the advertisement's claims, I DO NOT have the real internet in my pocket). If you think you do have the real internet in your pocket, try visiting a car company web site with your iPhone.

A camera with a lens that size will never be worth a damn, so I don't have much hope of better picture quality.

Sheldon

3G is no magic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22920740)

Apple isn't going to play it up much as the average consumer will have no clue.

Speed, you say? The iPhone is often slow on WLAN. I don't think a 3G network is going to make much difference. The problems are more in the speed of the processor.

All that aside, the iPhone is a very useful device, but it should be even better now that the SDK is out. Apple's canned software is great, but it only goes so far.

The only outward physical change I would want is to extend the touch screen to the top and bottom of the phone. This would make it easier to browse web pages.

Finally in Vermont? (1)

Mercano (826132) | more than 6 years ago | (#22920764)

Does this mean we can finally get iPhones in the AT&T-less hinterlands of Vermont. AT&T doesn't operate any towers in the state, so they won't let you open an account with a Vermont address. I think Alaska is in the same boat.

Re:Finally in Vermont? (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 6 years ago | (#22921180)

AT&T just bought CellularOne so it's here. AT&T Alaskcom has always been the dominant bulk microwave carrier but now they're dribbling their especial brand of incompetence to individuals.

In the market for a new phone and really not impressed with the various Treos, I picked up an iPhone. Great phone, finally a decent interface. A few major annoyances like the inability to sync notes from an OS X machine (???).

Too bad AT&T couldn't figure out how to keep both the iPhone and my wife's L6 running on the same account. One phone or the other would work, not both. Recommended alternatives - get another iPhone. Actual fix - dump the iPhone and back to the L6. Sigh. The lack of an accessible SIM card is really a deal breaker for me.

GPS == LEASH (0)

sciop101 (583286) | more than 6 years ago | (#22921092)

SAFEGUARD AND REVEL PRIVACY!

GPS is a LEASH!

A cellphone is a communications device, NOT a personal location device. If somebody needs to find me, I will tell them. My choice!

Admittedly, an emergency location device is convenient, but best kept on a separate, tightly controlled system.

Will it have a Fly Eye camera? (2, Interesting)

jmichaelg (148257) | more than 6 years ago | (#22921136)

Forget 3G. I'm curious if it'll have Michael Uy's Fly Eye Camera [google.com] . The patent is a couple of years old. I wonder if Apple is just sitting on the patent or if they're actively developing it.

A key benefit of the camera is if you're on a video conference, your image will be looking straight at the camera instead of off screen.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>