Waiting for iPhone 2.0
Apple’s new iPhone may well be a revolutionary product in some ways. But after testing one of the devices that went on sale late last month, I’m steering clear, at least for now, of the most shamelessly overhyped consumer product since Windows 95.
For all its admirable features–the large screen, gorgeous industrial design and advanced user interface in particular–the iPhone feels like a beta product. It’s still early in development and suffers from deal-breaker drawbacks.
The worst is the overall control-freakery from Apple, the manufacturer, and its telecom partner, AT&T. You want choice? Not a chance.
Consumer Reports notes that AT&T is one of the least-favored U.S. mobile carriers, for network quality and customer satisfaction. Worse, the company’s low-speed digital network is inadequate for a device that boasts of being Internet-native, and the Wi-Fi capabilities don’t make up for that lapse. (And never mind AT&T’s recent decision to become Hollywood’s accomplice in tracking customers’ Internet activities, not to mention its Big-Brotherish coziness with government snoops.)
I’m a frequent traveler outside the U.S., and this phone doesn’t cut it for serious international use. If I want to make GSM calls, I’m stuck with AT&T’s roaming rates; with my current phone I can swap SIM cards to use another carrier’s cheaper local service if I don’t like the international roaming rates from T-Mobile, my current carrier.
Apple can’t fix AT&T. But the device itself, however alluring, needs upgrades. For example, on the international roaming front, the iPhone provides no access to other carriers’ 3G networks, which means the phone won’t work at all in places like Korea, where my 3G-equipped GSM phone works fine.
The onscreen keyboard isn’t bad if you’re “typing” in landscape mode in the Web browser, because the keypad in that mode is sufficiently large to help you avoid errors. But if you’re trying to create an SMS or email message in the phone’s portrait mode–it doesn’t adjust to the sideways view with those applications–be prepared for some frustration. I wasted lots of time backspacing over mistakes and retyping things, and the “predictive-text” feature didn’t predict my words with much accuracy.
The camera is adequate for some purposes, and that’s the best you can say about it. There’s no zoom, and no video recording mode.
An especially cheesy “feature” is a headphone jack that requires an adapter for many popular headsets (or some surgery on your current headphone plug). There’s no excuse for this.
Then there’s the nonremovable battery, which Apple says is designed for at least 400 charge cycles and an unspecified number of charges at up to 80% of battery capacity afterward. That will steer people–perhaps this is the idea–toward new phones. Meanwhile, Apple has found another way to make money on this design choice: It’ll sell a new battery for about $80 and keep your phone for a few days in the process.
Despite running a version of the OS X operating system, the iPhone is locked down in its software capabilities, which means that third-party software developers–and therefore customers–are mostly out of luck if they want the kind of applications that have made other smart phones so versatile. Apple’s claim that there’s enough flexibility in the Web browser for third-party development is beyond ludicrous; it’s downright insulting.
More lockdown: The iPhone is unusable in any capacity until it’s activated with the phone company. Want to use it just for Wi-Fi-based Web browsing, plus video and audio and note-taking? Forget it.
Still more: I can use my current phone as a modem with a PC or Mac, something I do on occasion when out of range of a broadband or wireless network. The iPhone doesn’t allow this. Why not? (To be fair, some phones are locked this way.)
No doubt, some of the iPhone’s current drawbacks will be resolved with software upgrades. Some problems can’t and won’t be fixed, at least not in the U.S. version, where AT&T will be the exclusive carrier for the next few years.
All that said, I do love the way the thing looks and feels–and in many respects, the way it works. If other phone-makers don’t adopt the iPhone’s best features (I assume they will), I’ll definitely consider getting one at some point.
But I’ll consider it only when Apple starts selling it in Europe or Asia with 3G capabilities; when I can install a SIM chip from the GSM/3G carrier of my choice; when the software is significantly upgraded; and when third parties can give me the features I want, as opposed to solely the ones Apple thinks are good for me.
That sounds like iPhone 2.0, at the earliest. For now, the initial product doesn’t come close to living up to the hype.
Comments
Trick one to using predictive typing is to finish the word. Noticing an early letter that’s wrong and immediately backing up isn’t letting it do it’s job.
Trick two is to notice which letters may be giving you trouble and taking an extra bit of time with them, watching the popup and sliding over if needed before raising your thumb.
Translation: it’s pretty slick and I’ve made the transition to two-thumb typing in a few days of use. And it most certainly beats trying to text on a RAZR.
Posted by Michael Long at July 6th, 2007 at 11:48 pmI find this whole anti-hype thing incredible. I’ve had an iPhone for 6 days. First, the carrier — signal strength is good most of the time, about the same as T-Mobile, only hot spots are different; dead zones are different. Each has both. If I walk into my grocery store, it asks me if I want to access the wi-fi network; at home, my wireless network takes the load. Second, and most importantly, the device itself. It is truly the most awesome device ever offered. (Since I travel abroad only twice a year, I’ll skip the reviewer’s overseas-centric view of iPhone, which is absurd.) The phone works beautifully. Visual voicemail alone saves time and trouble. The Safari application works beautifully. The iPod is everything I wished my 5th generation iPod was. Email is fabulous — I never log on to my computer anymore just to check email. It is simply there. The iPhone can certainly use improvements, and no doubt it will be updated with firmware upgrades and additional offerings, but hey folks, I think reviewers like this have missed the whole point — I’ve got email, visual voicemail, an internet browser with HTML, a very smart phone, and an acceptable carrier — all in an elegant device that works beautifully and has given me not one headache. Apple has done for handheld devices what it did for the music industry, and before that the computer world — best in class, and for all else to lap behind, trying to catch up.
Posted by Christopher Olander at July 7th, 2007 at 8:00 amThe iPhone of course will be improved - that’s the way of the evolution of media - but why say it’s been shamelessly overhyped? It’s actually been talked about and predicted for decades, including by me, back in 1979 … http://paullevinson.blogspot.c.....rives.html
Posted by Paul Levinson at July 7th, 2007 at 12:36 pmI think this is actually a very fair commentary/review. One of the difficulties with hype is that it tends to force people into either agree/disagree modes (that’s also how cult indoctrination works). What Mr Gilmor has done is to help reintroduce colors other than black and white (plus the odd shade of gray some reviewers regard as “balance”) into the assessment of the iPhone. Two years from now many of those who are inclined to disagree with him and other “unpositive” reviewers will likely be even harsher in their assessment of the initial iPhone.
In particular, Mr Gilmor has pointed to those decisions made by Apple and at&t that are business, rather than technology based. It’s not only the physical device that is in beta, it’s also the business models that surround it.
A single example of this is to imagine he iPhone hooked up to a deal similar to that offered by T-mobile, which enables “cell phone” calls for free via wireless. This would have obviated some of Mr Gilmor’s concerns about overseas usage. My personal guess would be that T-mobile offered Apple this facility during negotiations, but that Apple chose at&t because the latter was willing to accept more revenue splitting than T-mobile.
Apple’s insight is that phone software is more important than hardware in 2007 (mainly because the hardware is so good). The pity is that this software cannot at the moment fully exploit its potential due to business decisions necessary at the introduction of such a relatively radical product.
Posted by Scott Lewis at July 8th, 2007 at 2:38 pmOk Dan, what phone do you have?
Posted by brad fuller at July 8th, 2007 at 2:40 pmI have yet to read or hear of an explanation as to why Apple selected AT&T as their mobile partner, when their service and coverage are at the BOTTOM of the lists from both Consumer Reports and JD Powers. What was Steve Jobs thinking? Why not go with a top-tier carrier for his break-through phone. For me, if it doesn’t work as a phone, then the rest is irrelevant. And, for me AT&T is not an option, as it lacks coverage in 4 of the 5 areas in the US that I travel to frequently, whereas T-Mobile and Verizon have excellent coverage in all of those areas. Did Apple simply ignore service issues and, therefore, demonstrate an arrogant disregard for us, the customers?
Posted by Shannon York at July 8th, 2007 at 4:16 pmAT&T does allow other phone numbers to be transferred to the iPhone. Several of my friends have already done that.
>> Dan writes:
“Then there’s the nonremovable battery, which Apple says is designed for at least 400 charge cycles and an unspecified number of charges at up to 80% of battery capacity afterward. That will steer people–perhaps this is the idea–toward new phones. Meanwhile, Apple has found another way to make money on this design choice: It’ll sell a new battery for about $80 and keep your phone for a few days in the process.”
I agree this is a poor decision for iPhone owners, but perhaps Apple chose profits over their customers’ best interests.
If half of the estimated 10 million yearly buyers of iPhones replace their batteries each year that amounts to added revenue of $400 million!
Posted by Phil Baker at July 8th, 2007 at 9:50 pmBrad, I’m using a Nokia N95, currently on loan from the company for some journalism-related experiments. I’m going to buy it.
Posted by Dan Gillmor at July 9th, 2007 at 1:13 amOne of my jobs is helping to keep new york city’s largest nephrology & transplant practice in hand held devices and cell phones. Under my desk is a tomb of failed gizmos going back years. The devices failed because they never really did what my people wanted in w way organic to their daily work. I should say that for us a SIM for Europe is a ridiculous thought. Also, sending the phone away for a battery after a year or so is about $30 more than buying one at a verizon store for a crummy phone. The fact that AT&T is the carrier is a non issue for us since their signal is dandy as is the edge network for getting email and sending messages. These are the functions which we care about. But more important is that the iPhone does exactly what we and probably the entire hospital staff need it to: sync all of our addresses and phone numbers in a mindless way, allow update of calendar functions, dial any phone number in an address book at a touch. Is it perfect, of course not, it needs a to do list to be perfect. Will apple update the firmware, of course they always do. And your comment about you can’t activate the iPHone without a contract is just whining. The iPhone is a business between two very large corporations that requires compromise so each can recoup their investment. So Dan, if you are getting rid of your iPhone just send it over to me. It will be put to excellent use.
Jonathan Lorch, MD
Posted by Jonathan Lorch at July 10th, 2007 at 11:45 amDirector Medical Informatics
“Over-hype?” Really, who over-hyped it? Not Apple.
Posted by Bob Lierle at July 10th, 2007 at 12:59 pm–”The worst is the overall control-freakery from Apple, the manufacturer, and its telecom partner, AT&T. You want choice? Not a chance.”
I don’t understand… you have 2 players: the phone manufacturer and the carrier. Who else is supposed to control the experience? AT&T has ceded tons of control to Apple, which is great. Try a Verizon phone lately? How’s that UI for user experience?
–”I’m a frequent traveler outside the U.S., and this phone doesn’t cut it for serious international use.”
Well then the iPhone’s not for you. It’ll just have to be for the 99% of Americans who have no need to regularly use their phones in other countries.
–”The camera is adequate for some purposes, and that’s the best you can say about it. There’s no zoom, and no video recording mode.
An especially cheesy “feature” is a headphone jack that requires an adapter for many popular headsets (or some surgery on your current headphone plug). There’s no excuse for this.”
Good point and good point.
–”More lockdown: The iPhone is unusable in any capacity until it’s activated with the phone company. Want to use it just for Wi-Fi-based Web browsing, plus video and audio and note-taking? Forget it.”
Why would you buy an iPhone and not activate it? The number of people who would do this would be infinitely small. This is a non-issue.
You make some good points, but many of your complaints are nitpicks that only apply to a tiny fraction of the potential user base. I, for one, could never go back to using another cell phone.
Posted by Matt Kaufman at July 11th, 2007 at 4:13 amNice comments, Matt.
Addition comments for Mr. Gilmore…
Despite your negative feelings, I would have thought you’d acknowledge what the iPhone will do for the category in general. The bar has been raised to such a level in terms of UI, new features, etc, that this can’t be anything but good news for future products (read: consumers), regardless of manufacturer. The rising tide will indeed raise all boats, offering more technology, choices, etc, to everyone.
With regards to Apple controlling the experience, so what? My God, my sign-up on iTunes beat the hell out of spending an interminable amount of time with someone filling in forms at the store. Besides, tell me who out there is providing a better experience in this category and/or how Apple has failed in this area? All I can say is thank God it wasn’t Dell blazing this trail.
Posted by Bob Lierle at July 11th, 2007 at 5:54 amIf the evolution of iPod is proof, I too agree that you should wait for iPhone version 2.0 or even 3.0. It looks beautiful, but having had the AT&T service before, and switching to Verizon Wireless the day number portability came to be, I would never switch back, even for the phone. FYI, my wife has an AT&T cellphone because of her work, and the service is still bad.
Posted by Andy Hunn at July 11th, 2007 at 7:49 amI wonder why anyone thinks that this type of review is useful to anyone. A lot of the criticisms are not even qualified. You do not even know whether Apple designed the recessed jack in order to increase durability (I have broken an ipod by lateral pressure to the jack whilst in my pocket), yet you claim there’s no excuse. You argue about the battery as if your $750 N95 uses a $5 battery. A lot of smartphones use batteries no cheaper than $50. I find it hard to believe that a person willing to pay $750 on a phone cares about the potential premium of $35 that iPhone battery costs to replace after more than a year of use. If you spend so much time roaming and want to use a local, presumably pay as you go SIM, then you can also afford a $60-$100 handset that goes with such a SIM and you can reuse it every time you go to the country–you sound regular enough traveler. Or just have an unlocked phone handy for roaming. Even then you do not sound like you care that much about costs if you intend to use 3G data in Korea.
Be consistent about the things you complain relative to your utility function.
I am willing to take such a review seriously but from a person that qualifies their statements by stating their buying and usage patterns. Your review implied iPhone 1.0 is a flawed product. It’s not. It does not make coffee but then Apple did not advertise it as such. And it’s not “shamelessly overhyped” unless you clearly state which hyped feature does not work for you. Software lock down is public knowledge. Use of EDGE is public knowledge (BTW read arstechnica.com. they have an article on their experiences with Verizon’s EvDO in Chicago area–it’s not as if AT&T is bad whilst Verizon never disappoints to meet their data offering specifications).
It’s all about your preferences and expectations that perhaps this product does not meet them. But please be clear about expectations so that we can put your comments in perspective and judge for ourselves. I feel seriously patronized by your writing.
However I certainly agree on one complain: T-mobile unlocks their handsets after 3 months into a contract. They just did for my Blackberry Pearl, just before I dumped them for AT&T and iPhone. Locking a phone with no indication on how/when to undo the lock, as is the case with iPhone, is representative of the state of cellular networks in the US: they either use CDMA2000 technology, which employs no SIM and thus unlocking is not applicable, or operate fractured and disparate GSM networks where the incentive to compete is weak. Try the UK where whilst there’s no law (as far as I remember) to force unlocking, market forces have resulted in limited (short) or no locking of SIM/handsets.
Posted by Ilias Prassas at July 11th, 2007 at 10:26 amBut how about some useful iPhone applications? I like to upload some video online. Are they going to improve clip quality?
Posted by Kolin Bergum at July 12th, 2007 at 11:59 pmHarsh review for a revolutionary device!
I enjoyed the iPhone for 13 days (14 day return policy), and had to return it for one reason. My company wouldn’t enable the (less secure) iMap features of Exchange. So, corporate email was only available through Outlook Web Access (OWA) or Outlook Mobile Access (OMA). These performed workably on the iPhone, but it was cumbersome. Each time going in, you had to type in userid and PW, and you had to scroll around on the screen with very tiny text to navigate — trying to hit the “X’ to delete in OWA was tricky. While doable, it just couldn’t do it easily.
I know there are some new companies around who are offering to push your email to the iPhone by downloading from OWA onto their servers, then pushing to the iPhone. This would specifically be grounds for firing in my company, so probably not worth it.
So, while the iPhone was great for pictures (magical interface, really!), music (coverflow is nice), and email (non-Corporate) scrolling is truly revolutionary…the Exchange limitation (for now) was a deal breaker.
By the way, battery life was far superior to any phone I’ve ever used (MotoQ now). As long as it lasts a couple of years, it’ll be great for most people.
A tiny beef was that AT&T charged a restocking fee on not just the iPhone (10%), but each of the accessories purchased at buy-time, even though they were not opened.
Incredible work, Apple/Steve, and as soon as Exchange works natively, I’ll be back immediately.
Posted by Michael Palmer at July 15th, 2007 at 5:51 pmI was hoping that the iPhone would have major PDA functionality, but the notes feature is very weak - a deal breaker in my job.
Also the spectre of signing a new contract with AT&T was a put off.
Since I am a current AT&T customer, the other option was paying $20/mo. over and above the new contract. That is pure insanity, as the cost for cancellation of a contract is less than half of the increased cost margin for current AT&T customers for the 2 year contract period!
I ended up purchasing an HTC X7501 because it has all the hardware features that Apple doesn’t and outdoes the iPhone in others:
3G, it is unlocked, keyboard and Palm Graffiti-like text entry, 3.0 MP camera with video, removable/replaceable battery, 8Gb drive, SIM card is easy to swap out, software can be added, can use it without activation, VGA out, BT, WiFi, GPS radio, the list goes on.
Of course the HTC is bulkier than the iPhone but the the screen is 5.0″ compared to the 3.5″ of the iPhone. The magnetic keyboard can also be left behind.
For a first effort the iPhone is incredible, but the v1.0 deficiencies, cell carrier lock-in, and have a locked software suite are all too Big Brother for my taste.
Keith Walker
Posted by Keith Walker at July 26th, 2007 at 11:33 pmI’m surprised by many commenters’ willingness to accept what’s on their plate and not insist on better. In particular, this bit:
>>>I don’t understand… you have 2 players: the phone manufacturer and the carrier. Who else is supposed to control the experience? AT&T has ceded tons of control to Apple, which is great. Try a Verizon phone lately? How’s that UI for user experience?
Posted by Dan Gillmor at August 19th, 2007 at 8:00 am(Reposting; the comment got truncated last time)
I’m surprised by many commenters’ willingness to accept what’s on their plate and not insist on something better and achievable. In particular, this bit:
“I don’t understand… you have 2 players: the phone manufacturer and the carrier. Who else is supposed to control the experience? AT&T has ceded tons of control to Apple, which is great. Try a Verizon phone lately? How’s that UI for user experience?”
This betrays a common mind-set. Two players? Aren’t you missing the third player? That’s the person who buys the phone and subscribes to the service. THAT’S who should control the experience, to a fairly major degree, and who would control it if we didn’t permit these companies to dictate things so completely.
As I said in the initial piece, there’s an enormous amount of innovation in this device. When Apple fixes what it surely knows is wrong with the thing — and that specifically includes the ability to do business with a different carrier — then I may well buy one.
By then, of course, other companies could well match or beat the iPhone’s best features. Apple has given them an opening.
Posted by Dan Gillmor at August 19th, 2007 at 8:03 am