Apple Hires IBM Chip Designer Who Had a Non-Compete Clause

Apple recently hired an IBM chip designer, Mark Papermaster, who was the vice president of microprocessor technology development at IBM. Now IBM is suing Mr. Papermaster for violating a non-compete clause. According to CNET, IBM released the following statement:

"Mr. Papermaster's employment by Apple is a violation of his agreement with IBM against working for a competitor should he leave IBM. We will vigorously pursue this case in court."

Non-compete clauses are tricky things. In the state of California, where Apple is located, non-compete clauses are illegal, and out-of-state non-compete contracts have, in the past, not been enforced (Application Group, Inc. v. Hunter Group, Inc.). However, the court case has been filed in New York, and I'm not a legal expert, so who knows where this is headed.

Link to CNET story.

Apple Has $24.5 Billion in Cash. Now What?

It's time to play that game again. It's called, What Is Apple Going to
Do With All That Cash? Well folks, they're going to continue to sit on
most of it. If they do anything, it will be small acquisitions like the
$278 million dollar deal for PA Semi.

You see, Steve Jobs has no interest in buying someone else's vision.
Apple has its own vision. And what it needs is more people who can help
bend technology toward that vision. Apple has a vision about
smartphones, and the engineers at PA Semi have some skill at making
small processors work in smartphones. They were a match made in heaven.
That's the kind of deal they're looking for.

If you want to check the validity of any Apple buyout rumors, and I'm
surprised hedge funds haven't started this game yet (maybe they're too
busy with the recession), just ask yourself, can Apple take the people
and throw away the hardware (or software or whatever). If the
intellectual property is too valuable to toss, then the buyout rumor
isn't true.

Is the First-Gen iPhone Better Than the iPhone 3G?

I was sitting on a Chicago train on my way home from work, playing a game of Teto Teto!! on my first-gen iPhone. The lady sitting next to me suddenly asks, "Is that one of the new ones?"

"It's the original version," I responded.

"Oh, I wish I still had mine. My husband upgraded me the iPhone 3G, and I hate it. It only gets 5 hours of battery life."

"Do you like the apps and games and stuff?"

"I don't know. It keeps crashing and I can't get anything on it."

What followed was a 10 minute whining session about the iPhone 3G and her husband's bad decision making. A part of me wanted to troubleshoot her problems, but instead I just nodded in sympathy. For strangers, I know to keep my nerdery in check.

But the conversation on the train confirms my feelings over the past month of not wanting to upgrade. My original decision was based on economics. No free text messages? $10 a more a month on top of an already outrageous pricing plan? An upgrade fee on a free upgrade, huh? Higher taxes on the bill? No thanks, but maybe someday.

I'm one of those people who rarely makes a call on my cell phone. But here I am, paying AT&T Wireless $39.99 a month to make make 20 calls a month. That's over a $1.00 a phone call for mainly local calls. So you can see, I'm already getting fleeced.

But the battery issue is a deal breaker. Having a charged battery is the difference between having a phone or carrying around the world's most beautiful brick.

Steve Jobs was right about 3G, the technology isn't ready for prime time, at least not in the US. But nevertheless, there it is, on the phone because people were whining about it incessantly. And sure enough, they're selling like hotcakes. But at what cost to customer's perception Apple and the iPhone?

Video Reviews of the Samsung Instinct

You may have seen the commercials of the Samsung Instinct that compare it side-by-side with the first-gen iPhone. Here is a video review (in 5 parts) of some of the phone's features, done by PhoneDog.com.


Pt. 1: Web Browsing


Pt. 2 :Multimedia A


Pt. 3: Multimedia B


Pt. 4: Email


Pt. 5: Messaging

iPhone Competitors Should Focus on Keyboard

Here's some free advice to companies like Nokia and Research In Motion: focus on the keyboard. It's amazing that so much money is being poured into making touchscreen clones when it's obvious these companies simply don't have the software-developer talent to compete with Apple. What these companies need to do is spread FUD (fear uncertainity doubt) about the iPhone's touchscreen keyboard and point out that most people still prefer a keyboard with keys. Check out the Samsung vs Instinct video below. The whole point of the commercial (that the Instinct has GPS, the iPhone doesn't) was outdated as soon as it was made. And how much money do think was wasted on it? Competitors, focus on something that's likely not to change. I mean, the iPhone is still going to destroy you, but this way, it'll take a little longer.

Mobile Firefox Looks Good

Check out this video demo of Mobile Firefox. One thing that Apple should take away from this video is the disappearing URL bar. I can't understand why Apple let the URL bar take up so much screen real estate. It should go away when the page finished loading. Give the viewer maximum screenage. Another strike against Mobile Safari is that it also keeps a bar on the bottom of the screen that accesses and adds bookmarks and navigates to tabs. I know the iPhone offers a larger screen that most cell phones, but that doesn't mean we don't want every centimeter of it to view web pages.



Firefox Mobile Concept Video from Aza Raskin on Vimeo.

How Much is Apple Getting from AT&T for Each iPhone 3G?

Now that AT&T is no longer delivering revenue sharing, I wonder how much they're giving Apple upfront for every iPhone activated?

A clue may be in the price Vodafone is selling a contract-free iPhone 3G in Italy. They are selling the 8 gb for 449 euros, which is about $691, and the 16 gb for 569 euros, which is about $876 (according to Google's rate conversion for today).

If we assume those prices are what Apple would sell the iPhone in the US, then AT&T is reimbursing Apple $492 for the 8 gb and $577 for the 16 gb.

If we look back to revenue sharing and say Apple was getting $15 a month per contract, that comes out to $360 for each iPhone over a span of two years. Could AT&T have upped the ante in order to get the more draconian activation rules in place?

If I were AT&T, I would definitely up the ante, especially knowing just how powerful the new enterprise features in the iPhone are. They have to be salivating at the thought of getting contracts from the corporate world--the easiest big money out there. Plus, they are making an extra $10 per month on the $30 data plans. If Verizon didn't regret passing on the iPhone the first time they saw it, they have now with the iPhone 3G.

I did not think Apple would allow the kind of shitty customer experience that comes with phone activation for the iPhone. But I think all that upfront cash changed their mind.

Is the iPhone Too Cool for Companies?

With all its enterprise-friendly features, there has been much speculation about whether this version of the iPhone will take away a large amount of market share from the Blackberry in the corporate world, or maybe even replace it.

I would argue that perhaps no matter how sophisticated, powerful and easy to use Apple makes the iPhone, companies will not make it the standard phone they give out to workers. It simply comes down to the issue of class; the executives do not want to be on equal footing, even technology-wise, with someone way down the ladder.

Case in point. In my short career span, I've worked for several different companies in several different industries. The one unifying aspect of my jobs is that no matter how computer-intensive my job duties were (including editing videos), the executives of the company always had a better computer than me. And from what I saw, these same executives never did anything more computer intensive than check their email. So, unless Apple puts out a Nano version of the iPhone, it will probably be Blackberrys for the blue-collar white collars, and iPhones for the white-collar white collars.

I'm Convinced We Won't See 3G iPhone at WWDC

With all these rumors of boxes in warehouses, faked iPhone print ads, and secret envelopes from Apple, it's a wonder we haven't seen more actual photos of the 3G iPhone.

My prediction: we won't be able to buy the 3G iPhone next week. In a month, maybe. I think next week is all about iPhone 2.0 and iPhone OS. Afterall, WWDC is all about developers, developers, developers.

Gary Krakow: Apple Needs to License Blackberry

Ever have your grandpa complain about new technology and tell you everything was better in the old days? Well, here is a video of Gary Krakow from the Street.com saying Apple needs to put Blackberry and Windows Mobile on their iPhone. Now, this guy is the Senior Technology Correspondent for TheStreet.com, and I think that tells you everything you need to know about TheStreet.com. "Put the Blackberry on the iPhone." Hilarious. Also, notice how he treats the young woman at the beginning of the video. Also tells you everything you need to know.

iPhone 2.0 Interface Video (Fake But Cool)

This is an impressive video, a fake, that looks like it's the introduction of the 3G iPhone from Steve Job's upcoming presentation at WWDC. It features a home screen that goes into landscape mode when turned on its side. It has shows messages popping up on the home screen along with various controls on the home screen.

Something to Think About the 3G iPhone's FCC Approval

Remember this iPhone tidbit from a statement from Apple on April 12, 2007 announcing Leopard's delay?

"iPhone has already passed several of its required certification tests and is on schedule to ship in late June as planned."

Yep, Apple was kept up-to-date about the exact level of approval the iPhone had garnered up to that point, even though it hadn't been officially approved by the FCC.

Also, according to the FCC's own filing, the iPhone had been signed off on by the testers by April 19, even though the official approval didn't come until May 17, 2007. Not sure what this means, but it's interesting to remember going in to WWDC.

Tech Jokers Gizmodo "Confirms" 3G iPhone Launch at WWDC

Some people take Gizmodo too seriously. They become offended when they see Gizmodo post porn next to their gadget news or pull adolesecent pranks at trade shows. If you know that Gizmodo is written for 14-year-old boys, then you'll understand their style. That said, you need to take the same context for their announcement today of the 3G iPhone:

"We all suspected it, but now it is confirmed: sources close to the 3G iPhone launch have told Gizmodo that Apple will announce their new model at the WWDC Keynote on June 9th. The second-generation iPhone will be available worldwide right after the launch, and not at year's end, as previously thought. The new model will also herald new sales policies in some countries."

Citing unnamed sources "close to the 3G iPhone launch" is not equal to a confirmation. If they had an email from Apple's PR, that would be a confirmation. There are a bunch of reasons why Gizmodo's article is shady. First off, they only say the 3G iPhone will be "announced" at WWDC and will go on sale "right after the launch." So, when exactly is that? Wouldn't a confirmation give you a hard date for the iPhone going on sale?

The truth is, the iPhone has not been approved by the FCC yet, so nothing can be confirmed. There is no confirmation, and my "sources close to the situation" say Gizmodo is making up shit to drive pageviews.

$150 mil Blackberry Fund vs $100 iPhone iFund: Fight!

Research in Motion is matching Apple and seeing them one half better with their $150 million Blackberry Partners fund to invest in developers for their mobile platform.

"The BlackBerry Partners Fund will focus on evaluating companies in all regions of the world and investing in the long term success of those that demonstrate market leadership and unique differentiation," said John Albright, Managing Partner of JLA Ventures, who will also assume the role of Co-Managing Partner of the BlackBerry Partners Fund. "Whether it's access to corporate data or the latest craze in mobile entertainment, we want to fund companies that are forerunners in driving adoption and further enriching the mobile experience."

With Google's Android, Apple's iPhone, and now RIM, one wonders if there are enough developers to go around. The iPhone is the sexiest and most fun device to develop for and will attract the most creative developers, but RIM has a huge market and potential for larger profits.

Link to press release.

Blackberry 9000: iPhone Ripoff Only in Color Scheme

Crackberry.com gives a video tour of the new Blackberry 9000. I have to admit, it's a good looking phone, but that's because they stole all their style from Apple (I still think the Blackberry Pearl looks better ).

Blackberry Pearl

Just from the video, I can tell I could never go back to the limited screen real estate of these types of phones. The best example of this in the video is when the reviewer is browsing through YouTube videos. All that is shown is a single line of hyperlinked text for each video. How am I to be enticed by a screenshot of cleavage? Video follows:

Will Apple Allow AT&T to Discount the iPhone?

Arik Hesseldahl from BusinessWeek in the article , "Why AT&T May Deep-Discount the iPhone."

With less than two months to go before Steve Jobs takes the stage at Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference, where he's expected to unveil a new iPhone, it appears that AT&T may not be convinced that new bells and whistles will be enough to get droves of new customers to switch from other wireless carriers. So after a year of charting a new wireless business model by selling the vaunted iPhone at premium prices, the nation's biggest phone company may resort to the oldest trick in the cellular book: big discounts.

Gruber from Daring Fireball seems to disagree with Hesseldahl's logic.

The problem is this: why would Apple allow AT&T to sell iPhones for half the price of what iPhones cost in Apple’s own stores (including this one)?

Subsidies only work when they’re sold in conjunction with two-year contracts. It’s possible that Apple could do the same, and sell subsidized AT&T-contract iPhones in Apple Stores, but that would mean abandoning the innovative (and very appealing, very successful) model of activating a new iPhone at home, via iTunes, rather than sitting around in a store for 45 minutes making uncomfortable small talk with a salesman while waiting for your credit check and your old phone number to transfer over.

You’d think this might be worth a mention.

From a financial aspect, Apple allowing deep discounting makes a lot of sense. The more wireless-plan contracts that AT&T can pick up, the more profit there is for Apple via revenue sharing. This is on top of the profit Apple makes on the sale of the hardware alone. A good percentage of the iPhones that Apple sells in its stores are bulked shipped around the world to places like Russia, which supposedly has amassed a market of 500,000 unlocked iPhones. These unlocked phones make Apple less money because they lost out on revenue sharing.

But the real problem with the deep discounting process is the customer experience, which is extremely important to Apple. To get a discounted phone, usually you have to sit with a rep in the store or on the phone as they take your credit card and have you sign the contracts, etc. Once the wireless plan is activated, then they charge you the discounted price for the phone and you walk out of the store with your new phone. I agree with Gruber: there's not a snowball's chance in hell Apple will allow this in Apple stores. And there's a bunch of reasons why Apple wants you take your iPhone home and activate it by hooking it up to iTunes. But, is it there a way Apple could maintain its retail customer service experience and still allow the discount?

Here's an idea: there are two seperate approaches for the $200 discount, one for AT&T stores and one for Apple stores.

In AT&T stores, a customer must suffer the pain of sitting in the store through the finance check and contract signing. At the end, customers can walk out of the store able to make phone calls with their $200 iPhone. But what about iTunes? Apple surely wants those users to connect to iTunes and buying all that media right? That's where the iPhone updates and the SDK comes in. People still have to connect it to iTunes if they want all that cool shit that's going to come out soon. Not to mention the iPhone is the "world's best iPod." Of course people are going to hook it to iTunes.

But with the Apple retail store shopping experience, nothing changes. You're still getting the same minimalist experience. You have to buy the iPhone at full price, and you can still ship it to Mother Russia or the Congo or wherever to be unlocked. Or, you can take it home, activate it, and AT&T cuts you a $200 credit to your account or a rebate check. I think the typical Apple shopper will forgo the instant discount for the convenience and coolness of shopping in the Apple store. The typical AT&T store shopper? Probably not.

Apple's Glass Ceiling

In a post called "Noted for Future Gloating," John Gruber from DaringFireball.net calls out Douglas A. McIntyre for this post, where McIntyre says:

"The big wall that Apple cannot knock over is the wall that being in second place erects. The really substantial buyers, corporations, who could move Mac sales toward 15 million or 20 million units, never did buy the Apple product and they won't now. It represents extra work for them, and extra costs. Extra costs are not popular these days.

The Mac has hit is glass ceiling. Apple investors may be hoping that the machine can make it out of the consumer market to keep the rapid growth going, but that is not in the cards."

I think McIntyre is way, way premature with his prediction, but I also agree, there is a glass ceiling for Apple for computer sales. But the reason that McIntyre's statement is worth ignoring from an investment perspective is because Apple's market share in the consumer market is still very small and there is still plenty of room to expand. Gene Munster from Piper Jaffray thinks Apple has 20% of the consumer market in the US and 10% outisde the US. I think those numbers are way too high.

If Apple hasn't even touched the corporate market, which is estimated to be about 70% of all computer sales, then there's also potential for a glass ceiling to be created for that market. McIntyre may be right in that, in this recession, some corporations are not interested in extra costs. But believe it or not, some don't really care. Especially corporate executives. As someone who works for a corporation, I can tell you there are those who toss away several grand a day on silly expenses and wouldn't blink twice toward ordering a MacBook Air on a whim--just to check it out.

Apple remains an investor's dream because surprise growth is what gives stocks really big moves, and Apple over the past few years has been relentlessly expanding into new markets, providing that surprise growth.

The most successful example of Apple invading a market then expanding into the mainstream is the move from the iPod to the iPod Mini, which was introduced at a price point that drove iPod sales to well over 100 million in a relatively short time.

The iPhone is Apple's most recent foray into a ripe mega-sized market and could easily follow the iPod to iPod Mini route. A more subtle move is the software Numbers, Apple's sneak attack at Microsoft Office Excel. Numbers is nudging its way into the consumer market, but it's really better suited for small businesses. Who starts small businesses? Consumers. What do small businesses sometimes grow into? Corporations.

The height of Apple's glass ceiling for their computer line probably defined by the fact that they make premium products. And premium products always start out with a premium price. But if they out innovate the way they did with iPods, one day they can be so far ahead they can release an iPod Mini-like product which is affordable yet still a premium technology-wise over the competition. The MacBook is a step in that direction. If we ever see a $600 MacBook or iMac (sorry the Mac Mini, without peripherals, doesn't count), I think it'd be game-set-match.

Link to Gruber's post.

Link to Fortune's "Analyst: Apple’s U.S. consumer market share now 21 percent."

Apple Now Makes More Money From Selling Music Than Warner Music Group

From a New York Times article:

"Apple sold $881 million worth of music and accessories in the last quarter. That figure rose 35 percent from a year ago. And the NPD Group now counts Apple as the largest seller of music in the country, ahead of Wal-Mart. Apple, in fact, is on track to have greater revenue from selling music (and accessories) this year than the entire revenue estimated for the Warner Music Group."

From the music industry's perspective, you can kind of understand why some are so bitter about Apple's success. While the music industry struggles financially, Apple is making record breaking revenues off hardware that plays their content. Personally, I have no sympathy for the record industry. They essentially shot themselves in the foot through their own greed (and continue to do so every time they sue a music fan for "stealing"). And also, all those years of ripping off artists and overcharging for media like CDs doesn't give them much of a leg to stand on.

The Times: Apple's 3G iPhone Order Is Already In to Manufacturers

British newspaper The Times is reporting that Apple has already placed its order for the 3G iPhone.

"Times Online understands that Apple has placed an order with its Asian suppliers to produce 200,000 of the new 3G iPhones by the end of May, rising to 2 million - 500,000 per week - in June."

It's important to note that the iPhone is not currently being manufactured. The FCC hasn't yet approved the device yet, and due to the public nature of FCC documentation, as soon as it's approved we will know (but not before the actual approval). So, it's possible that Apple has sent over the schematics and has run the numbers past the manufacturers and is now shooting the breeze waiting for the FCC.

Is the iPhone undergoing the FCC approval process right now? If they were, I'd think Apple would have introduced the 3G iPhone already. Since Apple doesn't control when the FCC releases the approval documentation, they could be taking a chance that the documentation would be released before they could announce the 3G phone and place their own marketing spin on it. Of course, maybe Apple doesn't care so much anymore about complete and total secrecy and control now that the initial iPhone has been long released to the world. I wouldn't bank on that though.

Will the 3G iPhone Need FCC Approval?

There's been talk that the release of a 3G iPhone is just around the corner. Most of the rumors come from financial analysts who pay attention to things like the amount of product inventory of stores. Apparently, they've noticed that the availability of iPhones has begun to dry up and claim Apple is clearing out old stock for the new. If true, they say, the 3G iPhone is merely weeks away.

There's one small catch. The FCC needs to approve the phone, as an entirely new radio (3G) is being introduced into it. According to Compliance Engineering Magazine, this process takes a while:

"Depending on the FCC workload, product certification could take from 60 to more than 100 days. "

The initial filing for FCC device approval is not public record, only the FCC's final stamp of approval is. So people trolling through the pages of the FCC's website won't find anything until the iPhone is actually approved. Apple submitted the first iPhone on March 9, 2007 and received approval on May 17, 2007. The process took a little over two months. Apple chose to announce the first iPhone well before they even submitted to the FCC, but whether they'll do the same again is unknown.

Required reading: FCC device approval documentation.

Tom Kravitz on Why Apple Won't Be Going With the Intel Silverthorne Platform

Tom Kravitz from CNET cuts through all the hype and tells why the Silverthorne (Atom) processor is not likely to be in an iPhone soon:

"I'll go out on a limb: Apple is not going to use this generation of Atom in the iPhone or iPod Touch. Atom is a good stepping stone for Intel's low-power design teams, but it's still an order of magnitude away from the power consumption goals Apple requires for those products. Come Moorestown in 2009 or 2010, maybe that's different, but we're not there yet."

I think the door is still left open for a tablet device though. People want a good battery life for their phone, not so much a portable computer.

Link to article.

iPhone vs BlackBerry 9000

Glad to see Blackberry taking style tips from Apple. Now if they could only make their OS as diverse and easy to use as the iPhone, they'll still have a fightin' chance.

Dvorak: The iPhone is Not a Computer

Cranky ol' John Dvorak has this one right, I think. I wish people would stop calling the iPhone a computer. The iPhone is a powerful portable device, but it lacks the functionality of a computer, mainly in the realms of input and creativity.

I went without Internet for a couple weeks and found myself severely limited in what I could do with my iPhone. Anyways, its wrong to compare a desktop to the iPhone, as they're both meant for two different purposes.

"What's worse is that people leave these little devices everywhere. And, generally speaking, they leave them all over the place unlocked and with limited encryption enabled. The ease with which someone can steal these things and rob the data is a little ridiculous. I cannot tell you how often I've shouted the words, "Hey, you left your phone!"

And, yes, the kids are all looking for alternative platforms, but what do kids know? Seriously, what do they know?"

Link to article.

Ars Technica Reviews Gelskins for the iPhone

Is it me or are girls obsessed with dressing up their iPods and iPhones? I think the iPhone looks best without any skins or cases whatsoever, but that's just me. I also like my women like that too.

Link to review.

Wired's Latest Article on Apple

Wired has just posted online their latest look at Apple, "How Apple Got Everything Right By Doing Everything Wrong." The author, editor Leander Kahne, has a new book coming out in a few weeks, Inside Steve's Brain. The article is worth a read, if not entirely accurate. And check out some commentary around the web.

Video: iPhone Compared Side by Side to Chinese HiPhone

12 Future iPhone Apps from Read Write Web

Is it just me, or are these the most boring dream apps imaginable? Read.

Dial By Photo

Cool video of an app I hope can be ported over to the SDK.

Possible Scenario for "No Background Processes" VoIP Problem With iPhone

In my previous post, I pointed out the problems of using VoIP on the iPhone as a secondary phone at home. The application would be severely limited for incoming calls because of the "no applications running in the background" rule. If someone calls my VoIP, my iPhone won't "ring" unless only the VoIP program running on my iPhone (will it run in sleep mode?). That is not a feasible solution. One possible scenario is that the VoIP software running on a computer in my home sends a text message to my iPhone saying so and so at this number is trying to call, please launch the VoIP app. Although, by the time the text message arrives, the person would probably have hung up. However, the phone number would still be there.

A better solution would involve Apple adding notifications between a home computer and an iPhone. So in this scenario, the VoIP program is running on my computer and notifies iTunes a call is coming in. iTunes, in turn, notifies my iPhone, and my iPhone asks if I want to launch the associated VoIP app. These types of notifications are not possible yet, but something that Apple could easily implement. Notifications could be expanded for email alerts, iChat messages, and even severe weather alerts.

iPhone SDK: Programs Won't Run in the Background

Silicon Alley Insider and others are throwing a little cold water on the iPhone SDK by pointing out a very important limitation of the SDK:

"Only one iPhone application can run at a time, and third-party applications never run in the background. This means that when users switch to another application, answer the phone, or check their email, the application they were using quits. (p. 16)"

That is really bad news. That means my dream VoIP scenario of receiving calls at home won't work because I'd always have to launch the program and keep it open while at home--too much of a bother.

Read. Silicon Alley Insider.
Read. TechCrunch.

VoIP on the iPhone

One nugget from the SDK launch that may have flown under your radar is when Steve Jobs said that Apple will allow VoIP apps on the iPhone, but only using WiFi. I am very excited about this, as I get poor cell reception in my apartment. I can instead rely on my trusty WiFi signal for phone calls at home. Imagine being able to answer calls, both VoIP and cellular, using just one device, my iPhone. This SDK is a game changer because of how it ties into the combination of superior hardware and OS of the iPhone, something that even Google's Android can't hope to offer (they don't control the hardware) or compete with in terms of overall quality and user experience.

*Update* I guess it didn't slip "under the radar." It made it to the front page of Digg.

Robert Scoble: Steve Jobs "Lying" About Flash

Former Microsoft employee Robert Scoble says he has a source that says Steve Jobs is being a liar liar about flash:

"Today I got a note from someone I know who works closely with Adobe and Apple. He saw my “Apple stabs Adobe in the Back” post and wanted to give me some details about what’s going on between Adobe and Apple. He says that he’s seen Flash running on an iPhone in a lab and that it’s been running for quite a while and that it’s not a technical issue that caused Steve Jobs to go public about not putting Adobe’s Flash on the iPhone. He wrote “Geez - my Chumby with half the CPU horsepower can run Flash8/AS2.”"

So what if it can run flash? It also runs World of Warcraft. Jobs said it runs too slowly, so how does the above information make him a liar?

Apple: 10 Million Phone "During" 2008

There's been a lot of back and forth whether Apple claimed they would sell 10 million iPhones by the end of 2008 (including those ~4 million sold last year), or 10 million during 2008 alone. Both Silicon Alley Insider and Piper Jaffray got the same official word from Apple:

"We spent a lot of time parsing his comments and those of other Apple (AAPL) officials, then figured out an easier way to solve the mystery: Ask Apple directly. Their answer: Apple plans to sell 10 million iPhones during calendar 2008 -- not including last year's sales. And if you don't trust us, check with Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster, who says in a note today that he asked Apple the same question, and got the same answer."

Fortune Magazine's Steve Job Interview

A few interesting iPhone tidbits from Fortune Magazine's interview of Steve Jobs:

"We had a different enclosure design for this iPhone until way too close to the introduction to ever change it. And I came in one Monday morning, I said, 'I just don't love this. I can't convince myself to fall in love with this. And this is the most important product we've ever done.'

And we pushed the reset button. We went through all of the zillions of models we'd made and ideas we'd had. And we ended up creating what you see here as the iPhone, which is dramatically better. It was hell because we had to go to the team and say, 'All this work you've [done] for the last year, we're going to have to throw it away and start over, and we're going to have to work twice as hard now because we don't have enough time.' And you know what everybody said? 'Sign us up.'"

They might have said, "Sign us up," but they were probably thinking something else. Like, "You son of a ..."

Job's "do it over until it's right" approach is something only companies as rich in cash as Apple is can afford to do, especially on a project as big as the iPhone. Yet I am glad, as are Apple shareholders, that Jobs took the time to get it right before releasing it. They could have released a different phone and still made tons of cash in the meantime because it was an Apple product. That's one stone in the good karma pile for Apple, at least in my book.

"It was a great challenge. Let's make a great phone that we fall in love with. And we've got the technology. We've got the miniaturization from the iPod. We've got the sophisticated operating system from Mac. Nobody had ever thought about putting operating systems as sophisticated as OS X inside a phone, so that was a real question. We had a big debate inside the company whether we could do that or not. And that was one where I had to adjudicate it and just say, 'We're going to do it. Let's try.' The smartest software guys were saying they can do it, so let's give them a shot. And they did."

What I find curious is that when they were thinking about putting OS X onto a phone, where did the touchscreen part of it come into play? Did the touchscreen phone idea come first, and touchscreen OS X would need to be created from scratch? Or was the software and hardware already sitting around in some form, and just needed to be molded into the iPhone?

The article is a good read, despite Fortune Magazine spreading it across 15 web pages. I copy & pasted it into a text document first.

Apple Shareholder Meeting

Comment on Apple's Shareholder meeting from MacUser:

"CEO Steve “the Hammer” Jobs said Apple had no plans to initiate stock buybacks or issue dividends, despite a bank balance of around $18.5 billion—that money will instead go to the construction of a giant statue of Steve Jobs that will stand astride San Francisco bay, holding an iPod aloft to the masses."

iPhone in the Kremlin

The successor to Vladimir Putin, Dmitri Medvedev, carries an iPhone, as well as many of Russia's political elite. Well, if Karl Rove carries one, you know the Ruskies got to clip up as well. Who said the cold war was over?

Link to article.

Karl Rove with his iPhone.

Blogger's Rant: From iPod Hater to Apple Agnostic to iPhone Owner

Check out this Dennis Leary-esque rant about everything from iPod hating to finally deciding to buy an iPhone. I have to admit, I went through a couple years as an iPod hater as well. I never thought they were an attractive device until the first black Nanos were released, and I thought iTunes was a piss poor way to manage a music library. I like iPods now, but iTunes still can be pretty frustrating.

iLounge's SDK Rumor

Via iLounge:

"The most controversial aspect of Apple’s SDK plan is its intention to formally approve or deny all SDK-based software releases for its devices. Our sources confirm that Apple will act as a gatekeeper for applications, deciding which are and are not worthy of release, and publishing only approved applications to the iTunes Store; a process that will less resemble the iTunes Store’s massive directory of podcasts than its sale of a limited variety of iPod Games."

Apple's total control over the apps means they could keep software like Skype off the iPhone. At first glance, it would seem that this would give an edge to an open platform like Google's Android, which supposedly will have no oversight. But I don't think it will. After all, Google phones will operate on major carriers like AT&T, same as the iPhone. And the only reason Apple would keep Skype off the iPhone would be to please the carriers. Will those same carriers allow indiscriminate data access to an Android phone? Seems unlikely to me. Wait until someone puts bittorrent on one of those phones.

It will be interesting to see a new battle playout between those who believe the iPhone and other smartphones are computers, and thus should follow the same "open" software rules, and those who see them as peripherals, such as gaming consoles or iPods, with specific rules for software development.

I Was Wrong: Android Is an iPhone Competitor

Andy Rubin shows off a touchscreen Google Android phone. Quake looks good on an iPhone-sized screen.




Here's the link to the corresponding BBC article.

Much Ado About $1 Billion

There are several Apple blogs who have become extremely irritated over the fact that some people in the financial world are saying unlocked iPhones have cost Apple $1 billion in unrealized revenues. Is that a ridiculous notion to explore? For 99% of the world's population, yes. Apple makes a shitload of money on every sale of an iPhone, with or without revenue sharing from a wireless company. However, the people who are bringing up the $1 billion number are financial guys, and they are trying to crunch imaginary numbers about the future. This really is an issue about profit margins, and unlocked iPhones have smaller profit margins than iPhones sold and used on revenue sharing wireless networks. The analysts are not in the business of asking a question like: Will Apple Inc grow? The real question is, by how much?

There's been an unpleasant crossover between blogs of people who love Apple's technology and financial blogs. It was easy for the Apple enthusiasts to get drawn into the financial blogs that praised Apple's new technology. But now that the goal in this recession is to punish any sliver of perceived weakness, the same Apple enthusiasts are upset the financial guys still aren't focusing on the technology. My advice is to continue to enjoy and write about the specifics of the technology, but stay away from the money side of things.

iPhone Reselling Is Its Own Economy

NewsFactor.com has an amazing article that gives a glimpse into the seedy world of iPhone reselling. It makes an interesting study of the current global economy. The iPhone is a case where demand outstrips supply, and whole industries are built around delivering the iPhone to all areas of the globe and making the technology work with the region's wireless infrastructure...all at an inflated price (or not, thanks to the falling worth of the US dollar).

Great quote from the article:

"One reseller admits he got a friend to print business cards and pose as a small business owner so as to dupe an Apple Store manager into letting him buy 100 iPhones for his "employees."

China Mobile Doesn't Need iPhone Like AT&T Needs iPhone

The news around the blogosphere today is that China Mobile says it had 400,000 iPhones connected to its network at the end of 2007. This should answer any questions about why there will never be an agreement between Apple and China Mobile. China Mobile does not need iPhone to attract customers. In the US, the wireless companies need every advantage they can get, hence AT&T agreeing to revenue sharing to gain the exclusive privilege of selling the iPhone. In China, there is one dominant player, China Mobile, and no need to give ground on financial negotiations. 

Intel's Silverthorne & the iPhone: Part II

Interesting comment from Jon Stokes at Ars Technica on Silverthorne, the new chip from Intel many thought was destined for a future iPhone. Stokes' take on the Silverthorne is that in its current form, it can't be used in the iPhone, so don't expect it in the next iPhone refresh.:

"Indeed, at one point during a sit-down with Intel the rep told me that the warm, bulky prototype I was holding would give me the "full Internet in your pocket." I started chuckling, pulled out my iPhone, and said, "I already have that." He gamely responded that the iPhone's browser doesn't support Flash (in my opinion that's a feature, not a bug), but my point was made."

The Intel rep made a good point by bringing up Flash, something not available with the iPhone's current ARM chip but would be with Silverthorne, if it would fit. I concede that no flash on the current iPhone is not much of loss. But Silverthorne is about the future. As wireless broadband speeds increase, people will want their YouTube and other flash videos, like those on the New York Times website.

AT&T to Offer Free WiFi to Broadband Subscribers

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that AT&T will offer free access to its 10,000 WiFi hotspots “to nearly all of its broadband Internet customers starting early next week.” It had previously been offered only to its premium broadband customers.

This is good news for iPhone and iPod Touch owners who also get their broadband through AT&T (like me). I will report on how it works when the service is up and running.

iPod Touch & Wifi

The most interesting comment from Apple's 2008 Q1 quarterly earnings report came from CFO Peter Oppenheimer.

"This new iPod [Touch] has the potential to grow the iPod from being just a music and video player into being the first mainstream WiFi mobile platform running all kinds of mobile applications."

Unfortunately, WiFi hasn't proven to be a reliable public utility. Searching for free public access tends to be a frustrating experience, even in downtown Chicago with its diluge of WiFi signals. I've tried to use both my MacBook and iPhone to connect to these seemingly free WiFi networks, and it rarely works. There are weak signals and "fake" open networks that actually require you to log on and pay via a web page (mostly hotels.). I don't even bother with WiFi on the go anymore, and unfortunately have to rely on EDGE. I hope Apple is thinking more toward wireless broadband services with broader coverage in the future, like the Kindle's lifetime subscription to EVDO. Wouldn't it be cool if you could buy a $20-a-month unlimited data plan for the iPod Touch, like the iPhone has from AT&T? Now that would change things, especially if there were broadband speeds.

How to Make the iPhone Speaker Louder

If you stick a needle through the speaker holes on the bottom left side of your iPhone (not the right side, that's the microphone), you will eventually poke a hole in the piece of plastic which keeps dust and dirt particles out of your phone. Perforating the plastic will make your iPhone substantially louder. A forum thread at ModMyiPhone has more details and firsthand accounts of the process. It appears there is not much chance of damaging your iPhone doing this, but don't take my word on that.

Hopefully, Apple will figure out a way to fix the speaker loudness in the next version of the phone, as most people complain about how quiet the phone is. It seems the phone is capable of producing a good amount of sound, but poor design is muffling it.

Copy & Paste on the iPhone: Wherefore art thou?

iPhone 1.1.3 is released and still no copy and paste. Can Apple pull off copy and paste on the iPhone? Are they even trying? Check out the classic video below to see how it might be done.



iPhone Copy and Paste from lonelysandwich on Vimeo.

Is Apple's Secrecy Gone?

Just as Gruber and others were commending Apple for their ability to keep new products secret, it turns out that for this year's Macworld, most of Apple's offerings were leaked well beforehand.

In fact, 9 to 5 Mac was the first to describe the MacBook Air in September 2007 in a post titled "Slim Aluminum Coming Soon From Apple," stating the laptops would be “considerably slimmer that current MacBook,” "the screen reaches much closer to the edges than current MacBooks but is the same size as current MacBooks, indicating a somewhat smaller footprint"and “there is something strange about the touchpad.” (9 to 5 Mac was also the site which first leaked pictures of the “fatty” Nanos). The 1.1.3 software update to the iPhone was leaked (captured in a video), and movie rentals were leaked and confirmed via numerous media sources. It might be that Apple can maintain secrecy for the really big announcements, but for Macworld 2008, Apple was leaking like a screen door in a submarine. Still, I will recognize that the secrecy surrounding the iPhone was a great coup for the company.

Video of iPhone Part of 2008 MacWorld Keynote

This is an edited video showing just the iPhone announcements during Steve Job's keynote at this year's MacWorld. I went back to watch this again because I couldn't remember if Jobs had announced you could alter destinations within route directions in Google Maps. Unfortunately, you still can't. My favorite announcement of the keynote was Google's My Location for the iPhone. My second was the Apple TV Take Two, although I am wishing for high def TV show rentals to be added.

The Steve Jobs 90-Minute Keynote in 60 Seconds Video

Watching the entire 90 minutes of the Steve Jobs keynote is not necessary (trust me, you don't need to this year). Thankfully, the insanely cute Veronica Belmont of Mahalo Daily gives us the 60 second version. Link.

The First iPhone Commercial: iPhone Nostalgia

The very first television commercial for the iPhone, aired during the Oscars in 2007.

iPhone-Clone Meizu MiniOne

Check out what's on the screen of this Meizu MiniOne. Look familiar? At least they have the software chops to rip off Apple that closely.

BusinessWeek Ponders Silverthorne as the Future of Mobile Apple

BusinessWeek has a convincing article that points to Intel's Silverthorne being at the center of Apple's mobile future, both for the iPhone and perhaps a new class of notebooks.

"Although the tiny Silverthorne is not as powerful as Intel's top-of-the-line Core2 or Core2 Duo, it will support the x86 instruction set that makes a PC chip a PC chip. That's especially noteworthy in terms of the iPhone. Right now, the main chip inside the iPhone comes not from Intel, but from Samsung. And the Samsung chip is not an x86 chip, but one based on a core from Britain's ARM Holdings (ARMHY).

The possibility of squeezing an x86 chip like Silverthorne inside a future iPhone would make adapting software from a future Mac computer for Apple's handheld substantially easier. (This assumes that Apple makes good on its promise to make the iPhone software development process easy and open.) Suddenly, the iPhone would be capable of running pretty much any Mac software with few, if any, programming changes."

This conjecture along with Apple's recent patent application for a docking station for a ultramobile computer hints toward the notebook as a "pod" of your digital life as opposed to the centerpiece. The combination of new technology in mobile chips and synching allows for very lightweight yet powerful mobile computers, which will allow for full access to the power of the Internet and also a select (yet still large) amount of data from a user's digital life. These computers will finally have battery life that maintains the computer's usefulness, a synching process that is relatively painless (as it is with the iPhone), and a light weight and size that is truly portable . My MacBook weighs around 5 pounds and I have come to hate the idea of taking it on the go. But if there was a notebook that only weighed a pound, I would gladly stuff it into my bag every day and take it to work, even if I had no plans to use it.

David Lynch Video: Don't Watch Movies on iPhone

I've never enjoyed a David Lynch movie, but I give him props for his uniqueness. He's a bit retarded in this video, however. I bet he won't be buying an iPhone.

Video of Doom on the iPhone

This video makes a good follow-up to my previous post about precise directional control for gaming on the iPhone. Putting Doom on an iPhone is merely for curiosity sake. You can tell by the awkward two-finger firing controls the game would not be playable, at least in any ejoyable way.