I just dislike the Win interface and my primary reasons for using a Mac - photo/graphic editing and music - are like yours for using a PC. The Mac is just head and shoulders above the PC in those areas like the PC is head and shoulders above the Mac for gaming. As for why people will pay for it, it's EXACTLY the same reason they'll pay $150 for a pair of Nikes when you can easily get a $30 pair of sneakers that will do the same job. It's the same reason while people will buy a BMW, Mercedes or Lexus when a Saturn gets you from point A to point B just fine. It's about the cool factor and Apple completely gets that. It doesn't matter whether you or I get it because we are NOT in their target demographic.
Wow. I just watched the videos of the iPhone on apple.com, and DAMN, I want one now! Looks freaking awesome! But Cingular? Ugh. Guess I'll have to pass and get a Q for Verizon instead.
I own a Treo 650 right now and it is ok as multifunctional device. This new iPhone looks like it will be far superior to any of the Treo lines or other Windows Mobile based phones as well. With the Palm OS you cannot multi-task, the Windows Mobile OS provides multi-tasking, but just like it's big brother it isn't very good at handling several programs running simultaneously. This phone looks like it should be a breeze to be checking you email in the background while surfing the net, and staying involved in a conference call, all at once, and maybe taking a picture or two in the meantime. It just looks smooth and simple in the way it operates. $600 is really not that much considering the Treo and Windows Mobile phones sold for roughly the same price when they were first released. If I was on Cingular I would pick one up in a heartbeat. I've had some terrible experiences with Cingular though and will never go back.
If not for just getting a BlackJack (which I love), this would be on the top of my list. Just not sure about buisness applications (veiwing Excel, Word, and Powerpoint), and the lack of 3G support makes web-browsing almost a non-factor.
Pros Slick looking. WiFi. Music/Movies (also a con). Cons No exchange or office support. No replaceable battery. No expandable memory. First party software only. Music/Movies (also a pro). I think this'll be a decent device not worth the price tag and that the 2G iPhone that will inevitably come out will fix a lot of the problems they'll have with this device (much like MS with the Zune).
I actually think this is why most people love the iPod - simplicity. Most people who will buy this won't care about exchange or office. This isn't a blackberry or a device designed for business. If you can get log into your POP account through mail (which you can) or your yahoo/gmail/msn/aol address through a browser (which you can), no one will care about exchange. And none of those people will get Word documents or Excel spreadsheets either. I can't imagine many people who bought a Sidekick expanded their memory. I have expandable memory in mine and I wouldn't have the first clue about how to use it. And, frankly, the vast majority of iPod users never run out of memory, so it would be hard to imagine the iPhone users doing it. The hardcore music player people are going to stick with the iPod anyway. As for software, I'd be willing to be that VERY few folks are going to be interested in third-party software. This device is aimed at the same people who bought the Sidekick or the Razor, not folks who want a Blackberry. That's what will make this device so popular. It isn't aimed for people who want expandability, third-party software or the ability to access their exchange servers. It's aimed at kids who change their cell phone every two years and have probably already been through at least two iPods.
I'd disagree. This phone is specifically aimed at taking out some of the smartphone market share. All the comparisons are being made to the Motorola Q, Blackberry Pearl, Treo 650/700, T-Mobile Dash, etc. The price is comparable to top quality smartphones, as well. How many of the people who bought a KRZR, RAZR, or ROKR are going to be able to afford a 600 dollar phone?
I guess this is the question: as another poster pointed out, he paid nearly 400 for a RAZR when it first released. When I heard this price, it was actually in line with what I expected. I generally feel most high-end phones/PDA to be out of my price range. The cost and my general feelings on launch hardware will keep me away; but I do look in on phones from time to time and this price didn't surprise me very much. In addition, everything I've seen so far certainly points to the possibility of a very strong product.
I don't agree that a mac is better for music, especially if you were one of the poor ones who went through the os9 to osx transition where it took a year and a half to get direct monitoring to work or drivers for your audio interface. With graphics mac has an edge, especially comparing stock mac to typical stock pc. I'm at a point now where I need to get a high end video card for 3D work for that very reason. For music, though, I find XP to be an excellent operating system. Much, much better than previous Windows versions. Vista scares the hell out of me for professional audio work but will be great for graphics so go figure. It will take me a few years to make that leap more than likely.
Afford? Most will put it on their credit card and end up paying more for it after the interest is finally paid off.
Actually... http://www.pinkisthenewblog.com/ I've been looking around at some of the "buzz" and celeb gossip blogs this morning. Virtually ALL of them are freaking out over the iPhone - the same exact group that went nutso over the Razr. These aren't geeks or business people. These are, mostly, girls and young women, who buy the coolest brands and the hippest fashions. When Paris Hilton had a Sidekick or a RAZR, they all had them because every magazine had a picture of her using one (and virtually every other celeb). They buy the video iPods and send out 1000 text messages a week. Ypulse has a great story about a new report all about "Generation Next" (i.e. 18-25 year olds and the biggest market for people selling cool things) that, among other things, points out that "they want to be rich and famous...love technology" etc. calling them "lazy, crazy and fun." http://ypulse.com/archives/2007/01/generation_next.php This is the generation that will swallow the iPhone whole. The thing may have Blackberry-like features, but I can promise you that Apple won't be running ads in Fortune or the Wall Street Journal trying to get business folk to convert.
Since OSX ain't going anywhere for a while - especially now with the Intel chip and the underlying unix-like structure - the transition won't be an issue any longer. That was a pain for a lot of people I know. I know studios still running in 9 because of the cost of the transition. But, the ease of connecting in OSX with native software/hardware (hell, even I can set it up!) and the incredbile range of software, nevermind the fact that virtually every big studio on the planet runs on Macs (at least in the control room), it makes it the obvious choice for audio engineering.
Those sites also went crazy for the Blackberry 8700 and the Blackberry Pearl though I doubt many people would say RIM marketed those to the "hip" crowd (though the Pearl was somewhat marketed towards this segment, I'll admit). Cingular's already talking to the corporate arena about the phone: http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/10/cingular-kicking-rear-and-taking-names-for-iphone/ Contains a press release to Cingular's corporate clients about the iPhone. I could be wrong but with a huge pricetag like this, this phone is going to be compared as a smartphone. People who already have an iPod will be paying 6 bills for a phone and if you don't have a phone you'll be paying 6 bills for a phone and an iPod nano (except it's not the sweet smaller version). I agree with you that people will buy this thing. However, I'm not in the boat that thinks this will be a huge smash hit. I think Apple gets cut a lot of slack by people and the deficiencies of their products aren't looked at. The one thing that might help this phone is the 500 dollar 4 GB version that's coming out. I still wouldn't pay that much for a phone that wasn't a fully featured smartphone but it's only 100 dollars more than the RAZR was when it first came out (what a ripoff, eh?) and people will find a way to justify that purchase.
I don't see this replacing my video ipod, I see it replacing my p.o.s. phone from Verizion. I'll still have my ipod plugged into the stereo of my MINI Cooper or plugged into the speakers out by the pool. I think this will enable me to have some photos with me at all times, a few videos and some music if the desire strikes. All packaged in a slick phone, that includes the ability to surf the web and retreive email while operating a OS that I've embraced since its launch.
Haven't read the whole thread, but seems this might be a problem for apple. --------- Cisco May Sue Apple Over New Apple iPhone Cisco executives at the John Chambers keynote at CES 2007 claim that they own the name iPhone. "This was registered by Cisco nearly 7 years ago and was recently rolled out by Cisco subsidary Linksys for their WiFi phone which is labelled iPhone". they said. Cisco trademarked the term "iPhone" in 1999 as "computer hardware and software for providing integrated telephone communication with global information networks. After being told that Apple had today launched a new mobile phone labelled iPhone the Cisco executive said "I am certain we will be consulting our legal advisors. This will be a sensitive issue". they said http://www.smarthouse.com.au/Communication/Industry?Article=/Communication/Industry/K7T5L4J5
Apple is really kicking butt these days; their market cap has almost doubled in the past year with almost a fifteen percent jump in the past week alone. But Cisco's market cap is still more than twice as big. Apple's ability to market new gadgets is something many companies could learn from, but I doubt Cisco's attorneys are ones to be trifled with. Apple may get to use the name, but it will cost them.
every big studio used to, and if they still have a ProTools room it will be Mac based. Otherwise you would be surprised how many are using Wintel machines these days. It's not like it was. These days it really doesn't matter which platform you choose. For instance, the studio I hang out at the most still has a couple of 2" 24 track machines - but uses RADAR mostly with a PC running Samplitude Pro for mastering and editing. You will find alot of the big studios still work with outboard gear and RADAR systems - using the pc for editing. If you were a studio set up for analog - RADAR is the way to go... Again, there are lots of ProTools systems out there and those studios will be Mac based. Platforms in this field don't matter anymore though. Especially since no large studio is going to be using a firewire or usb interface and the new macs don't have pci slots. That leaves you using one of two solutions on a mac - the apogee symphony card with apogee convertors or a pci-e to magma pci chassis. Or dish out the cash for ProTools. Things will be changing now that folks like Euphonics are entering this arena - allowing even more flexibility in regards to choosing a platform. http://www.euphonix.com/ My point is, the choice isn't so obvious anymore. Cheers, Brock
