Tag: iphone

PPK claims that by designing only for the iPhone, we’re setting up for another IE6-like event.

This article counters that:

When Koch damns developers for professional hypocrisy and incompetence, I see a quiet revolution of mobile developers waiting for other phones to catch up to the iPhone.

It’s still early on for the mobile web, and I think that gives us reason to push things a bit more than would be appropriate in a Y2K, IE6 world. If developers don’t accept the limitations of conventional mobile browsers right now, mobile manufacturers may well start moving things forward.

If we can get close to parity or unanimity in the mobile browser space, we’ve succeeded, and then need to start getting back to traditional principles of progressful degrahancement and the like.

Marco Arment discusses the two sides of the iPhone app store — the popular side and the craftsman side — and how apps targeting the wrong one can find themselves on the wrong side of success. He takes, as an example, the Iconfactory skee-ball game Ramp Champ, which has been revealed to be a commercial failure thus far.

Alex Russell in response to PPK’s new mobile browser tables, which reveals wide disparities between various versions of mobile WebKit:

The important takeaway for web developers in all of this is that WebKit is winning and that that is a good thing. The dynamics of the marketplace have thus far ensured that we don’t get “stuck” the way we did on the desktop. That is real progress.

An interesting comparison of the details between the iPhone’s keyboard, and the Android keyboard, as implemented on the HTC Magic:

A virtual keyboard lives and dies by the details. It’s not that there’s a single feature which makes the iPhone’s virtual keyboard better than Android’s; it’s death by a thousand cuts. A number of small differences end up making a huge difference.5 Apple obviously spent a lot of time getting every little detail just right (well, except for the ducking dictionary), while Google decided to go ahead with what they had – which is usable, but no match for what the iPhone offers.

The 10% difference in physical screen size (while still being equal in terms of pixels) probably reduces performance by well more than 10%

Mike Rundle has a pretty great post outlining the common types of iPhone application interfaces, major apps that use each type, and the advantages/disadvantages of each.

John Gruber with some strong commentary on AT&T’s apparent inability to support the needs of iPhone users:

Apple slagged AT&T twice during the WWDC keynote, for their inability to offer iPhone users either MMS or tethering. These are not advanced cutting edge mobile phone features. That was seven weeks ago, and AT&T still hasn’t said a peep about making either feature available. Of course Apple is furious. They are dependent on an incompetent partner in their biggest market.

The AT&T relationship, now a curse, started as a blessing for Apple. At the beginning, Apple was able to negotiate pretty liberal terms with AT&T which allowed for features like the App Store and Visual Voicemail, which may never have happened with Verizon. It also provided a large-enough audience for the platform to be such a success, which may not have happened with a network like T-Mobile or Sprint.

Apple’s iPhone app approval process has been a disaster for many, and this is just the latest example.

A simple sales tracking app, MyAppSales, was rejected because it technically spiders the iTunesConnect site. So instead, the author is selling the source code for use by folks who are willing to provision and deploy the app on their own phones themselves.

Fortunately, the audience for this app is reasonably likely to be willing to do such a thing (they’re often iPhone developers themselves), so while it might be a passable solution for this particular app, it probably wouldn’t fly for the vast majority.

Apparently Apple and RIM are doing something right:

The two accounted for only 3% of all cellphones sold in the world last year but 35% of operating profits, according to Deutsche Bank analyst Brian Modoff. The disparity will become even starker this year when, he estimates, the two will take 5% of the market in unit terms but 58% of total operating profits.

You don’t always need enormous market share to have a very healthy business.

John Gruber, in his overall write-up on the new C&P functionality on the iPhone, summarizes Apple’s philosophy when it comes to releasing these types of features:

That we had to wait two years for the iPhone’s text selection and pasteboard is a good example of one aspect of the Apple way: better nothing at all than something less than great. That’s not to say Apple never releases anything less than great, but they try not to. This is contrary to the philosophy of most other tech companies — and diametrically opposed to the philosophy of Microsoft. And it is very much what drives some people crazy about Apple — it’s simply incomprehensible to some people that it might be better to have no text selection/pasteboard implementation while waiting for a great one than to have a poor implementation in the interim.

I tend to agree with the Apple stance. Don’t let perfection be the enemy of the great, but do let greatness be the enemy of the good/fair/poor.

Jim Dalrymple:

The answer seems quite simple: AT&T is afraid of what will happen to its network once millions of iPhone users start sending MMS and connecting their computer to the network.

I remember back in like 2002 hearing a Verizon Wireless employee warn a potential customer that they’re likely to use more minutes than usual with Verizon, since the network was much better than CellularOne’s.

This is much the same thing. Once you’ve made a phone that makes features easy to use, people are likely to start using them.

I posted this just about a year ago, when people were upset about the 3G upgrade policy, and it still holds true for the 3GS:

AT&T subsidizes the price of every phone it carries, by about $200. So that RAZR phone you got a few months ago for free was actually about $200. You’ve probably seen these un-subsidized prices if you’ve ever damaged a phone and had to purchase a new one at full price.

The new iPhone 3GS coming out has a similar policy, except that there is no grace for 3G owners since the 3G, unlike the original iPhone, is subsidized.

If you’re not near the point where you’ve paid off your subsidy — and usually that means being more than 18 months into your plan — you’re not eligible for an upgrade at the subsidized price. You can purchase an early upgrade for $200, which is essentially paying for a significant part or all of that subsidy, or you can purchase a plan- and subsidy-free phone for a $400 premium.

Gruber makes some pretty sane predictions, and they’re probably well-sourced:

More RAM will significantly help performance, too, and I believe the new iPhones will sport 256 MB of memory, up from the 128 MB in all current models. Prices will stay the same — $199 and $299 — but storage will increase to 16 and 32 GB. The improved performance will be one of the major new features that Apple will tout, but the only tech specs Apple will publish will be the storage capacities — just as with previous iPhones and iPod Touches Apple won’t publish any specific technical information regarding RAM or the CPU. (The CPU in particular, I believe, is something Apple regards as secret sauce.)

Looking forward to this one. More RAM and CPU would make for a much better iPhone, and I still love my first-gen.

no battery, but cute