Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

IPhone Will Fail in a Late, Defensive Move (2007)

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 59 posts

Re: IPhone Will Fail in a Late, Defensive Move (2007)

#41

Post by barrkel »

myspy wrote: post #40
barrkel wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I struggle to think of a single time Android has crashed on me. The iOS browser, on the other hand, crashed 3 times in my first day with an Apple device. But the primary reason I use Android is that it has features iOS doesn't; proper cross-app integration with intents, a replaceable launcher, a user accessible file system and best of all, I never have to deal with iTunes. I absolutely loathe iTunes. I've never had p…

User accessible file system? Are you kidding me? It's one of the great things to get rid of this thing. I see no advantage in there. Especially on mobile devices. Only another thing to understand and handle to get things done.

I'm talking about what I want in a device and OS. The file system isn't directly in any of the default apps, and nor is it visible in most apps. But if you want a file browser, you can install one easily; and nor is data siloed inside specific apps when it doesn't fit into predefined categories like Photo | Video | Music.

That's right: I want control over my data. I don't want apps from third parties thinking they're in control of my data.

Re: IPhone Will Fail in a Late, Defensive Move (2007)

#43

Post by hej »

jack-r-abbit wrote: post #15
bcrescimanno wrote: post #6

Hindsight, of course, is 20/20--but to be fair to this journalist, there were some very real reasons to think the iPhone wouldn't really succeedn (at least not in an industry shifting way). At the time, the carriers maintained almost full control over the whole ecosystem and if entrenched players like Nokia couldn't force their hand on anything, what reason did people have to believe Apple could? Moreover, the initia…

> let's not forget that it brought about a "touch-revolution." And let's not forget that when the iPhone was released it was not the first app enabled touch screen phone. I would say that Palm did just as much (if not more) for the touch revolution. It just did it in a bit more clunky way. The iPhone brought the sexy into the mix.

That's the technology. Apple actually made people want those touch devices. They were the first ones to package it correctly.

I'm sure there were many people who thought and wrote about rrepublics and democracies before the French revolution. But the revolution was what did it.

Maybe the technology of those other phones was revolutionary. But revolutionary technology no one wants hardly matters. Apple found the revolutionary package.

Re: IPhone Will Fail in a Late, Defensive Move (2007)

#44

Post by adrianonantua »

bcrescimanno wrote: post #7
markrickert wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the thing. These guys never go away. They keep getting paid to write flawed versions of the future that will never come to pass. That's why I don't put any weight in anyone who has "analyst" or "tech journalist" in their credentials.

Don't forget that there's a whole segment of these guys who are basically paid to get it wrong--being the one guy who says, "this obvious winner is going to fail" attracts a lot of eyeballs. Remember, being a pundit isn't about being correct; it's about getting people reading what you write.

Also, in the remote case he gets to be right, he will get known as the wise told-you-so guy.

Re: IPhone Will Fail in a Late, Defensive Move (2007)

#46

Post by Someone »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #20
thought_alarm wrote: post #16

When you get past the author's ridiculous pooh-poohing of Apple's products, the actual analysis of the cell phone industry that he quotes is pretty well right on the mark and sadly still applies to the industry in 2012. While the iPhone 1.0 lagged well behind established smart phones like the BlackBerry in a lot of areas, the iPhone was revolutionary in its overall quality, its user interface, and its web browser. It…

"Nobody would have predicted that in January 2007." To be fair, plenty of people did. Plenty of people didn't, of course: http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2008/10/22/revisiting-the-dumbes... The fact that so many people couldn't wrap their heads around the iPhone's success is rather shameful. Sure, there's a lot of solid reasons why there was plenty of friction and many hurdles, but at the end of the day money is supreme.…

"Is it shocking that $1400 of guaranteed revenue per phone would ultimately be embraced by the carriers regardless of their reluctance about some aspects of the process?"

If you add "in a world where, each month, there are a zillion devices with $1000 guaranteed revenue that, if you are lucky sell well for maybe a month" : yes.

At the extreme, it can be not worthwhile to sell a product with a $1.000.000 guaranteed revenue if, in order to make that sell, you have to instruct personnel at thousands of shops, provide marketing materials for those shops, buy advertising space, etc.

It is not only that $1400 that makes the iPhone attractive, it also is the fact that you just have to put up a hand-written sign "we sell iPhones" to sell them in large quantities, not for a few months, but for over a year, without any changes to the model. That is what surprised many people.

Re: IPhone Will Fail in a Late, Defensive Move (2007)

#47

Post by jack-r-abbit »

rbarooah wrote: post #22
jack-r-abbit wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> let's not forget that it brought about a "touch-revolution." And let's not forget that when the iPhone was released it was not the first app enabled touch screen phone. I would say that Palm did just as much (if not more) for the touch revolution. It just did it in a bit more clunky way. The iPhone brought the sexy into the mix.

I wasn't aware that the palm brought any touch features that weren't in the Newton.

I'm not either. But I am aware that the Newton was a huge flop and the Palm Pilot was a huge success... probably timing.

Re: IPhone Will Fail in a Late, Defensive Move (2007)

#48

Post by jack-r-abbit »

hej wrote: post #43
jack-r-abbit wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> let's not forget that it brought about a "touch-revolution." And let's not forget that when the iPhone was released it was not the first app enabled touch screen phone. I would say that Palm did just as much (if not more) for the touch revolution. It just did it in a bit more clunky way. The iPhone brought the sexy into the mix.

That's the technology. Apple actually made people want those touch devices. They were the first ones to package it correctly. I'm sure there were many people who thought and wrote about rrepublics and democracies before the French revolution. But the revolution was what did it. Maybe the technology of those other phones was revolutionary. But revolutionary technology no one wants hardly matters. Apple found the revol…

I think a lot of people wanted to use the Palm touch devices. There was a time when "Palm Pilot" was the "Kleenex" or "Band-aid" of the PDA world. Everything was a "Palm Pilot" even if it wasn't. Even future Palm products were "Palm Pilots" to the outsider. Now, Palm did not do a super job when it moved to the PDA+Phone mashup. It was clunky... not sexy.

Re: IPhone Will Fail in a Late, Defensive Move (2007)

#49

Post by jack-r-abbit »

minalecs wrote: post #29
jack-r-abbit wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> let's not forget that it brought about a "touch-revolution." And let's not forget that when the iPhone was released it was not the first app enabled touch screen phone. I would say that Palm did just as much (if not more) for the touch revolution. It just did it in a bit more clunky way. The iPhone brought the sexy into the mix.

there were a lot of touch devices pre iphone. I owned the nokia 770 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_770_Internet_Tablet around 06 and sony p900 around 04 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Ericsson_P900 . The biggest difference was the capicitive screen vs resistive screen and the requirement of a stylus for most things.

The funny part is that I know a lot of people that miss having a stylus... so much so that many are buying them now for their phones. I miss having one every time I have to take off a glove to interact with the nav app on my phone.

Re: IPhone Will Fail in a Late, Defensive Move (2007)

#50

Post by Terretta »

recoil wrote: post #32
minalecs wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there were a lot of touch devices pre iphone. I owned the nokia 770 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_770_Internet_Tablet around 06 and sony p900 around 04 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Ericsson_P900 . The biggest difference was the capicitive screen vs resistive screen and the requirement of a stylus for most things.

I remember being very excited about these devices (and others like the Treo) before they were released, then invariably found myself profoundly disappointed (or at the very least underwhelmed) when I actually got my hands on one. None of them really succeeded in delivering anything more than an iPaq or a Palm Pilot and a mobile phone awkwardly squashed together in an ugly package, and they all required you to use a s…

Most user friendly device before iPhone was probably Danger's HipTop aka T-Mobile Sidekick. It was actually fun to use, and innovated smartphone usability in huge number of ways. But it seemed marketed as more of a toy, too bad.
Post reply on HN