Generative aspects of the iPhone - and Google Voice vs. AT&T

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Fernando José Capeletto Neto on July 28, 2009 at 10:15am

Thanks God I no have anything from Apple.
The last good thing from apple was The Beatles.
Own article address one solution: 'Palm, if you’re looking for marketing material — take note.' rs
When Apple wake up will be too much later.
They should learn a lesson with Sony and The Betamax case.
And in 70´s this problem was only media without network communications.
Just because it Betamax takes so many years to die definitely.
In our networking times one mistake like this may crash one product quick, I hope.
Should to be laws involving freedom datastream and app compatibility compulsory for some developing languages enviroment embbed into mobile devices.
In these cases i like to consider devices with native Java and without 3rd app restrictions.

Permalink Reply by Everton on July 29, 2009 at 3:12am

Just a little correction here. Apple Corps (created and owned by The Beatles) is not the same company as Apple Computers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v._Apple_Computer).

Anyway, I completely aggree with Fernando. Such a lot of good [bad?] examples are already available for decisions like this, and Apple certainly has learned them in the past. Google keeps on outstandly growing exactly for the opposite reason: they make (or are prone to make) their services available and interchangeable to most of the users.

The "best" part, definetely, is:

"Here’s another testament to just how ridiculous this move is: GV Mobile’s developer Sean Kovacs says that the app was personally approved last April by Phil Schiller, Apple’s senior Vice President of Worldwide Product Marketing — the man who often takes the stage during Apple keynotes when Steve Jobs isn’t around."

My naïve bet is that Apple is trying to take as much profit/advantages as possible with this iPhone idea, just like they did with G3 a decade ago. They make these out-of-this-world products, but some decisions related to them are difficult to accept. What is difficult to accept is not easy to sell, so they go back to the white board.

Fernando José Capeletto Neto said:

Thanks God I no have anything from Apple.
The last good thing from apple was The Beatles.
Own article address one solution: 'Palm, if you’re looking for marketing material — take note.' rs
When Apple wake up will be too much later.
They should learn a lesson with Sony and The Betamax case.
And in 70´s this problem was only media without network communications.
Just because it Betamax takes so many years to die definitely.
In our networking times one mistake like this may crash one product quick, I hope.
Should to be laws involving freedom datastream and app compatibility compulsory for some developing languages enviroment embbed into mobile devices.
In these cases i like to consider devices with native Java and without 3rd app restrictions.

Permalink Reply by Fernando José Capeletto Neto on July 29, 2009 at 7:29am

Oh guy, you dont feel that i was ironic ?
Every tech fan or beatle fan know it.
There are a newspapper in Brazil for sale of used products with same name also.
Maybe Apple can create a data api for it in their devices.
(take it easy, was a joke too)

Permalink Reply by Charles Amega-Selorm on August 1, 2009 at 9:02am

Apple (AT&T) decision makes difficult to understand and very scary especially when they already have other competing SMS services on the almighty iPhone. This is a clear case of killing innovation. I think if this were a new developer trying to develop new Apple apps, he would stop at that.

Anyway, I think FCC's letter, http://blogs.zdnet.com/Google/?p=1499 will keep this discussion evolving and if found guilty must be made to open the iPhone up for more apps.

Permalink Reply by Ljubisa Gavrilovic on September 5, 2009 at 7:11pm

Betamax was superior video format used professionally long after home market decided to use cheaper and technologically inferior VHS system.

iPhone made impact for several reasons (technological, psychological, market vacuum) but possibly major advantages are full fledged OS on a mobile device (Mac OS/X - a variant of UNIX) combined with desktop level internet service applications (email/browser), mobile plans that include data service - internet and not to forget a new approach to user interface among other desirable features such as music/video player. In spite of success it lacks many features for no reason eg. no video recording, no bluetooth contact or data exchange, data sync only via iTunes, difficult application development model, locking mobile choice, complicated ways to replace batteries and GSM cards, short battery capacity, some reports not too good reception in low signal conditions etc.

Unfortunate decision for Apple was to tie it to AT&T mobile service creating closed loop of service choice and Microsoft like industry selling method - iPhone cannot be bought in Apple stores (or in general mobile stores - save hacked ones) as free independent appliance product - it can be purchased only as part of existing mobile service that usually tie user to one to two year mobile service plans - making alternative use calling for breaking of usage policy (unlocked phones break built in security model). Thus whole idea of innovation suddenly applies only to certain type of users.

Easiness of use, classy look appealing to show-off need often found among younger generation suffering of low self-esteem made it desirable - fashion type technological piece. Pity that Apple did not realize they could reach potentially larger group of users by allowing more openness. It shows that Apple rather caters to mediocrity user. My belief is that this lack of openness is going to be addressed by industry competitors (Palm, Symbian, Android), Apple gave a leg forward fulfilling ultra-portable mobile computing platform need and filling a market vacuum at the moment of release. Now that rest of industry realized that they have been sleeping too long in innovation area the game is changing slowly. More and more phones are coming out that would have similar or almost same approach.

As a side note I am not user of iPhone - simply it did not satisfy my need to have easily change provider depending of country I am in (i.e. to use local GSM cards). Interestingly most innovative industry "smart" phone fails to satisfy very basic mobile phone need - that much inferior product satisfy with no questions asked.

I am more happy to see proliferation of 3G data network USB modems for laptops allowing me to connect laptop everywhere in high speed together with increasing number of WiFi spots freely usable, than I am impressed with somewhat mediocrity feature approach of Apple with their phone. To me it just proves the fact that user base do not asks for much functionality or quality as long as they have good image for showing-off their status. As any fashion item - i consider iPhone as such - a fashion piece - and as every fashion piece - it comes in and goes out of fashion.

Permalink Reply by Ljubisa Gavrilovic on September 5, 2009 at 7:24pm

Charles Amega-Selorm said:

Apple (AT&T) decision makes difficult to understand and very scary especially when they already have other competing SMS services on the almighty iPhone. This is a clear case of killing innovation. I think if this were a new developer trying to develop new Apple apps, he would stop at that.
Anyway, I think FCC's letter, http://blogs.zdnet.com/Google/?p=1499 will keep this discussion evolving and if found guilty must be made to open the iPhone up for more apps.

IP telephony is on the rise - as much as Google Talk (chat, email check in and voice feature) there is simillar issue with Skype that offers same features - i do not see difference - Skype is available on iPhone why Google Talk shall not be?.... One is certain - telephony companies have been overcharging their voice service for very long time. Looks to me more like battle of market giants AT&T vs Google - catching Apple in between....

On this article i'd rather say that AT&T is pulling their power strings with Apple than that Apple is doing it on its own. For what I know - in order to make iPhone successful Apple had to create a specific contract with AT&T allowing AT&T to control many decisions on how Apple phone appliance is going to be used. Apple also likely see AT&T as more valuable ally than Google that from Apple perspective could be major competitor (Android platform, software publisher, video repository service - includes music etc. - all directly competing with apple software production, mobile phone, itunes store etc. etc. )