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.