With the media about to erupt in a stream of iPhone reviews, Steve gets his thoughts in first, taking Jobs' original line-up of phones that are "'smart', so they say" and comparing how functional they are in daily life. Are miniature keyboards really the problem? Steve thinks (not for the first time) that a lot comes down to where, when and how you need to use your smartphone.
Read on in the full article.
You can compare features until you bleed but what matters is the user experience. People (not phone geeks) want an easy to use multimedia phone with internet functions. And the iPhone wipes its ass with these geek phones in this regard.
Macboy wrote:You can compare features until you bleed but what matters is the user experience. People (not phone geeks) want an easy to use multimedia phone with internet functions. And the iPhone wipes its ass with these geek phones in this regard.
And the phone geeks will wipe their ass with all the features the iPhone user is missing out on because they didn't want to crack open the manual to learn how to use an already intuitive operating system. Have you even heard of the phones mentioned in this article, or are you confused because you didn't see them on display at your Cingular store?
yeah , it really comes down to usability .. i own myself an e61 and iam happy with it , like the ability of beeing always on , email , using it as a umts modem , but i have to be honest , the usability sucks ! all this mini buttons , joystick etc etc , i already am suffering some modest pain in my hand after my half hour commute during which i use to browser the net using my e61 .. moreover the symbian applications are really crappy , so all this rambling about the missing sdk ... i dont know , ia m a developer myself , so i certainly would love to be able to code apps for it , but its certainly not a killer feautre , where are all those killer apps on symbian plattform ? even things like opera mobile havent seen an update for half a year , despite badly demanding one ... and where is skype ? i checked out every single available voip software ( fring, gizmo, the builtin , truephone.... ) as far as stability goes , they are a joke , only the most forgiving geeks will tinker with this stuff ... so , my point is , there wont be any killer apps from small developers , but maybe from the big names , and i am sure that those companies will find a way working something out together with apple ... so what i really suspect , is that apple is trying to bring some QUALITY into the smartphone experience , if this means there wont be some crappy mini apps from the oneManDev hacked together over a month , so be it , i wont miss them
if this means there wont be some crappy mini apps from the oneManDev hacked together
I am afraid that is *exactly* what will happen: There will be a multitude of crappy mini apps for the iPhone, exactly because there won't be a real SDK for native OS/X programs (at least for now), but only that AJAX / Javascript / Web 2.0 stuff that is supposed to run on top of the iPhone's Safari browser - stuff that takes ages to load, produces Javascript errors en masse and is miles away from anything that one would call "robust".
I am afraid that is *exactly* what will happen: There will be a multitude of crappy mini apps for the iPhone, exactly because there won't be a real SDK for native OS/X programs (at least for now), but only that AJAX / Javascript / Web 2.0 stuff that is supposed to run on top of the iPhone's Safari browser - stuff that takes ages to load, produces Javascript errors en masse and is miles away from anything that one would call "robust".
yeah thats for sure 😊 , but in my view , websites targeted at the iphone , are just that , a website, i wouldnt call this a *real* application ...
"And the phone geeks will wipe their ass with all the features the iPhone user is missing out on because they didn't want to crack open the manual to learn how to use an already intuitive operating system."
And Apple won't give a rat's ass about this because they go for the mainstream, not for the 5% nerd.
"And Apple won't give a rat's ass about this because they go for the mainstream, not for the 5% nerd."
finally something we agree on: IPhone has nothing to do with high end smartphones, it's for the masses with no special needs and requirements.
There's no way the iPhone can be considered mass market at its current price point.
Honestly until people have a chance to use it there's no telling how great or not the iPhone UI will be in the real world (for all the reasons mentioned ad nauseum). Personally I think it will do OK as an iPod upgrade and it will have a fanatical following, but I can't see it being that significant in terms of the overall market (except it may concentrate some mind on experience).
From my point of view, it will never be able to replace my E70. Even if it has a QWERTY on screen, you can't type on it as fast as I type on E70, either on the normal keyboard or on the full one. What I see is that iPhone is just an iPod with a bigger screen, camera and a phone. So, where's the 5-year-ahead improvement? The multi touch screen?
I honestly don't think the iPhone is intended for the business market like the smartphones are. Apple has always stated that iPhone is iPod first and phone second, so there's really no need to argue which phone is better since they obviously have different purposes.
@E61,
No offence meant but i really think you need to learn more about your device as a lot of what you are saying is just not true. as firstly there is a wealth of truly great Symbian apps available both free and paid for. Why are you using Opera Mini when the built in Browser is just so much better unless you need to keep down your Data usage is a mystery to me but every one is free to have their own preferences of course. There are lots of different VOIP solutions available and if you want Skype functionality along with Google, MSN, SIP and Twitter there is Fring which despite what you say is incredibly easy to set up but i suppose every ones perception of what is good or bad is different but i definitely don't agree with you and think the E61 is in fact an excellent device if not one of the best i have ever owned.
Back to the main topic i am actually still of the belief that there really is not one ultimate convergence device as some are better at either Multimedia or Business although most can handle both well. This i why i recently purchased an N95 as my Multimedia device and kept my E61 for Data intensive tasks IMO two devices really are better than one well at least for now anyway is MO.
Marc
I've said this many times before, and will say it again: the biggest mistake Jobbs made was to call iPhone a smart phone and compare it directly with true smart phones (in the sense of the term we mean it). He should have just emphasized the (yet to be fully confirmed) intuivity of it compared to any phone.
Having said that, the jury is still out but iPhone should be pretty cool as a data/media consuming device (at least if you are near wifi in the case of the web), not so much as text input device. It would be hard for anyone to claim that the music, gallery and video apps look extremely sleek and intuitive, and the competition will probably have a lot to learn from it (even those that don't have touchscreens).
But I will certainly stick to my S60 for now at least. 😊
I would hardly call a $400 phone + 2 year contract "aimed at the masses". I would also not consider an anticipated number of sales of 10 million mass market, when compared to Nokia's sales...
The iPhone will appeal to those who want to combine an iPod with a phone, which is fine, but a smartphone aimed at the mass market it is not!
The iphone is out in 10 days. You haven't seen it or handled it. Even price (one of your comparisons) is pure speculation (a recent rumour suggests phone price as advertised is, essentially, the sim-free price). Bit disappointed in this, especially as you say that you'l have one to review very soon.
(I have had 3 UIQ phones and, since September, e61 which has proved to be very good esp with t-mobile dataplan. But still find many in-built apps are counter-intuitive and email attachment handling is poor. The web browser is useable with GPRS as well as in 3G area)
Bill
Why not use P1i to compare instead of m600 (even tho not a huge difference but fills up the spec sheet better) Also, user experience is the top thing IMO but a HUGE sense of experience is derived from--
1. one handed usage esp when travelling (or working on your comp/laptop with other hand)
2. easy messaging (without looking at phone even) and
3. easy and fast accessibility to most used functions like camera and music/web (like dedicated hardware keys, active lens cover etc which can be used without looking).
And on all of these, the iPhone sucks... bigtime!
With no removeable battery this presumably means that the SIM is embedded at assembly (unless theres an external SIM slot, which is not a good idea), which could mean this version is not designed to be sold as anything other than a network locked phone.
Even when your contract is up and it's unlocked, how do you replace the SIM. Just can't see this working in Europe.
Apple have assumed that only 10M units will be needed by close of 2008 - this is 1-2% of the global market. Can't see how the iPhone can be considered to be mass market. Also the restricted channels of sale will impact market share. For Europe HSDPA + GPS will be the norm this time next year - will the iPhone be able to deliver?
Whether the iPhone is a smartphone or not is probably a moot point. With S40 catching up with S60, Nokia marketing S60 phones as regular mid-range phones, and SE feature phones now able to multi task J2ME apps the smartphone distinction is quite likely to disappear in the next couple of years.
What the iPhone appears to be aiming at is the converged music/camera/media feature-phone space which is currently dominated by Sony Ericsson in Europe but which has no clear cut leader in the USA.
In that space users don't care about the ability to add millions of applications. 90% of media phones never have anything added to them except music tracks, ringtones, and the maybe the odd game. Poor text entry capability is also not an issue except in the case of heavy SMS users - which admittedly might be a significant factor for the iPhone's eventual target demographic.
I live near a college so I see large numbers of teenagers on the streets most days. About 9 months ago roughly half of them would wear an MP3 player with white headphones (presumably an iPod) whilst walking down the road or queueing for the bus.
Over the last few months I have noticed that the white headphones have become a lot less common but that about 1 in 3 of them now has a Sony Ericsson stereo headset instead (I know, it's sad that I notice these things). That's the market that Apple is aiming at initially - the iPod user base that is slowly moving over to Sony. When you look at it like that you can see why Apple is correct to initially focus all it's resources on the US market where there is no entrenched competition in the media phone market.
This might also be the answer to price vs mass market question. Apple can afford to charge a premium price for the iPhone in the USA because they are essentially defining a new category of device IN THE USA. The only media phone incumbents in that market are the relatively poor performing (from a multi media perspective) Motorola ROKR phones and TREOs. As the category becomes established the manufacturing process will bed down and improve and the price will fall just as it does with all electronics.
Having typed all of the above, I actually doubt whether Apple could give much of a toss about the opinion of the relatively small number of smartphone users who actually care about being able to install apps, type emails etc.
xerxes,
you have a point. However, the problem is with Apple fanboys (that's you, macboy) who think that because it's Apple we're talking about, everything they do is brilliant. In the same way that Apple fanboys won't consider a Nokia, most smartphone users (Nokia or otherwise) will not consider an iPhone. It's simply too expensive and too limited.
I'm sure the iPhone will sell very well (in the US at least), but mass market it ain't...
Well having used a p800, p900 and various pocketpcs in the past all using full screen keyboard software no matter how good the UI is on the iphone the fact that it hasnt got physical buttons will make the simplest of jobs like sending a txt message a right pain in the a$$.
Id like to see what the price of this is on a 12 or 18 month contract is when it hits the UK because if apple think we will pay anything near what they are charging in the US they can think again. Its got to be FREE on at least some kind of reasonable contract or it will bomb, and theyll have to include 3g.
The figures will tell... I agree with Macboy that the iPhone will sweep up the mass market. People are prepared to fork out extra if it means they get a simple user experienced combined with pure style.
This entire exercise is completely academic; not more than full acceleration while your gear box is still in neutral. You didn't even touch the iPhone, let alone used it. As someone with a vested interest in Symbian, you didn't miss an opportunity to lash-out on the iPhone ostensibly by comparing feature sets theoretically... give me a break.
LESS IS MORE, the lack of some features on the iPhone vis-a-vis the high-end Nokias doesn't mean much if the user experience will be as advertised. Finally, the iPhone already caused a paradigm shift with its UI � all future phones will adopt it in one way or another. You want to bet on it?!
Cheerio,
dovale
>>Comment: This entire exercise is completely academic
I disagree. Discussion of form factors and useage patterns is ALWAYS fund and useful 8-)
>>interest in Symbian, you didn't miss an opportunity to lash-out on the iPhone ostensibly by comparing feature sets theoretically...
Lash out? I thought I was being quite open minded, simply pointing out pros and cons.
>>Finally, the iPhone already caused a paradigm shift with its UI � all future phones will adopt it in one way or another. You want to bet on it?!
Eh? What paradigm shift? So it's got a touch-screen? Not very new, or convenient for many operations, see the comments above.
There are pros and cons for each device type (touchscreen PDA-like, and button-driven phone-like) and plenty of room in the market for them both. Which is partly was I was TRYING to get across.
Steve Litchfield
Perhaps you should change the wording of "battery can be removed" to "battery is user replaceable" and "non-removable battery" to "battery replacement requires taking in your iPhone to a certified Apple Service Centre and will probably cost you an arm and two legs".
Don't know why they call iphone's UI a paradigm shift, its looks more like an eye candy copy of s60 UI with an addition of touchscreen.
If the demos are realistic, it does look responsive compared to most smartphones.
Beyond that, it does simply look like good eyecandy.
Zuber
Any basic text book for would be spin doctors states: if you can't argue an issue, divert attention! That's exactly what SL and others are doing here - diverting attention at the best and misrepresenting at the worst.
The iPhone UI and promised user experience IS a paradigm shift, you guys can scream from now to eternity that it isn't, but the simple facts are against you: Glide a finger across the screen to activate the device and main menu. Slide your digit up or down to scroll through contacts. Flick to flip through photos. Tap to zoom in on a Web site.
Unlike present day touch-screen devices, the iPhone is using a new breed of touch-screen technology, which relies on changes in electrical currents instead of pressure points. This technology is also known as "multi-touch."
All today touch-screen phones are using "resistive touch" technology. It has two layers of glass or plastic and calculates the location of a touch when pressure is applied with either a stylus or a finger.
The advanced type of touch screen, featured on the iPhone and LG Prada, uses "projected capacitive" technology. A mesh of metal wires between two layers of glass registers a touch when the electrical field is broken.
Nokia too unveiled last fall online images of a prototype all-touch-screen cell phone called the Aeon, http://www.nokia.com/A4136028# but without disclosing any details of its features or market availability.
Finally, the iPhone will be the first product that puts the multi-touch feature in a mainstream consumer's hands - at a retail price of $500 to $600.
The paradigm sift is that it at least seems to make the use of the music player, gallery, web and email fairly easy and intuitive to use. Something that cannot readiliy said about S60. I am surprised that this is not something we could admit. Let's give it the credit it seems to deserve. But I will stick to my S60 at least for now.
Speaking of touch screens:
http://services.brightcove.com/services/preview/bcpid932595495?syndicationoffer=jA4ZN9Szy6%2BScNh40NawPQ%3D%3D
I have to say that I resent being called a spin doctor 8-)
I try and call things as honestly as I can. The single most significant aspect of the iPhone's interface is NOT its capacitive touchscreen, although that's pretty cool - though I reserve judgement for once I've seen how it fares outdoors and in the real world.
It's that Apple have gone back to basics and *thought* about what options to present to the user at each point in each app, reducing complexity and making things as intuitive as possible. Although there's a degree of this in (for example) S60, more could be done to hide away that (up to) 50% (depending on the app concerned) of funtionality which isn't used by 99% of users.
Watch this space for a video feature on this subject in the Smartphones Show, http://www.smartphones-show.com/
Steve