iPhone 4G speculation and rumors (1 Viewer)

[Joseph Bolus]

June is what we're hearing on the announcement. It probably has to do with

* Gearing up OLED displays in enough quantity for the anticipated demand.
* Availability of OS 4.0. (Required for the new device.)
* Cross-pollination with the iPad roll-out.
... and/or all of the above.

PLUS, if Verizon isn't totally dead as a carrier the device would have to be released after June since it's rumored that AT&T's original exclusivity agreement runs out at that time.

 

[Ted Todorov]

I really hope you guys are wrong about the OLED -- would like to continue to be able to use my iPhone in bright sunlight. OLED in its current form is a disaster, one more of those things that looks great on a spec sheet, but not in real life.

 

[Nelson Au]

re: OLED: I don't think Apple has ever failed to release a product that does not funtion acceptably. Knowing Job's attention to detail, the display technology that's used on the next iPhone should be great. The iPad looked great in the videos and images from the press conference/announceent, so it can't be worse then that!

 

[Joseph Bolus]

The iPad doesn't use OLED -- but that's mainly due to the size of the screen.

The speculation is that Apple wants to use OLED on its next-generation phone in order to help out with the battery life. Some of the rumors indicate that the display will be multi-layered (to help out with the blue life-cycle); and there may even be a tactile-feedback-control layer under the display (for better keyboard/game controls). The latter probably won't appear, though, until the second generation.

 

[DaveF]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nelson Au

re: OLED: I don't think Apple has ever failed to release a product that does not funtion acceptably.

Too many negatives, I think Perhaps you meant, "I don't think Apple has ever released a product that functioned unacceptably." It's for this reason that I think OLED is 50% likely. Too many reports they aren't usable in daylight.

And the iPad has a lower pixel density than the iPhone (132 vs 163 ppi). Both of which compare poorly to the Nexus One in a spec list, with its 253 ppi screen.

I love the Verizon rumor. I hope it's true. It would be perfect, staying with Verizon and getting a new iPhone! (Unless AT&T's ads are correct, that you can't do voice and data simultaneously on Verizon. In which case???)

 

[Joseph Bolus]

Any device that uses OLED efficiently will need to
* Provide a seal to keep water out.
* Provide glare reduction without decreasing overall brightness
* Retain flexibility to allow for a possible control layer under the display

I don't think you'll see an OLED display from Apple until these goals are met .

 

[Nelson Au]

Opps, yes, Dave, I typed my reply about OLED very quickly and didn't check the grammar. But you understood my point.

And due to my poor post, I hadn't meant the iPad would use OLED, just meant the new iPhone display has to look as good as that apparently does.

I was looking into replacing the touch screen surface on a used iPhone 3g I recently bought. In my studies, it appears there is a seal between that and the LCD to keep dust out. Of course it won't keep water out, but it does keep dust out.

 

[Ted Todorov]

Originally Posted by DaveF
I love the Verizon rumor. I hope it's true. It would be perfect, staying with Verizon and getting a new iPhone! (Unless AT&T's ads are correct, that you can't do voice and data simultaneously on Verizon. In which case???)

Yes, the ads are correct, CDMA/EVDO as currently implemented by Verizon/Sprint do not allow voice and data at the same time. Also keep in mind that AT&T's 3G (when not collapsing from overuse) is considerably faster than what CDMA can muster. Really Verizon's ace in the hole has been that they don't have many heavy data users on their network -- getting the iPhone would of course change that.

Of course if the iPhone users were spread amongst all four major networks, everyone would benefit.

 

[DaveF]

Quote:Originally Posted by Nelson Au
Of course if the iPhone users were spread amongst all four major networks, everyone would benefit.I continue to assert that Apple is leaving money on the table by being exclusive with AT&T.

 

[mattCR]

Part of why Apple stays in bed with ATT though is that ATT buffers part of the research and development and eats part of the sell through cost.

 

[Ted Todorov]

Originally Posted by DaveF
I continue to assert that Apple is leaving money on the table by being exclusive with AT&T.

Actually that is almost certainly not true: there is no way Apple would get the same (very high) per phone subsidy if they stopped being exclusive. You would absolutely correct in saying that Apple is leaving market share on the table, but even there Apple benefits: they will probably end up selling a lot more 3G iPads with $15/$30 per month/no contract ATT&T data deal, than they would with Verizon charging $60 per month with a 2 year contract, which is their and everyone else's current data only going rate. No doubt they extracted that sweet deal in exchange for continued AT&T exclusivity.

The benefit of dropping exclusivity that I was talking about is that no one cell network will be overwhelmed with iPhone data. If it would benefit Apple to do it, they would do it. Steve Jobs proves himself quarter after quarter as the most successful businessman in the phone and computer arena -- I trust that his calculation that exclusivity benefits Apple is correct.

 

[DaveF]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ted Todorov

Actually that is almost certainly not true: there is no way Apple would get the same (very high) per phone subsidy if they stopped being exclusive. You would absolutely correct in saying that Apple is leaving market share on the table,

They could potentially double or triple their marketshare by being non-exclusive. So, does the AT&T deal give them double or triple the profit per subscriber that they'd get otherwise? Ok, so I'm certainly wrong. Apple's analysts have certainly looked at this upside down and sideways and concluded that exclusivity still is better for profits.

 

[Sam Posten]

Is it so unreasonable that Apple could put out an LTE iPhone in 2010?
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=31508

 

[Ted Todorov]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam Posten

Is it so unreasonable that Apple could put out an LTE iPhone in 2010?
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=31508

Yes.

The article you linked says "by the end of 2010". The next iPhone is coming in June -- there will be no LTE coverage to speak of then. Everybody will start screaming at Apple that 4G is false advertising, that the iPhone is a toy -- you know the drill.

Also, Apple doesn't need to. Remember the endless howls about how the original iPhone would be DOA due to it being Edge instead of 3G? Then someone noticed that the iPhone loaded web pages faster over Edge than its competitors did over 3G. Oops. There will be a similar bake off when 4G comes out: iPhone on 7.2Mpbs 3G vs. Brand X 4G phone -- who will load the Web pages faster? My money is still on the iPhone.

Once LTE starts getting maturity (in 2011 or 2012), Apple will step in.

 

[DaveF]

What Ted said.

Apple is not going to release an iPhone for a non-existent network.

 

[DaveF]

http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/03/26/nexus-one-screen

Based on the Ars Technica article, I agree with DF's speculation the next iPhone will not use an OLED screen. I'm 50/50 on whether it will be a higher resolution than current models. While spec-sheet competition demands it, changing the iPhone screen resolution further complicates their product lineup as well as application development. And Apple has shown they will refrain from using top specs to stay with a balanced solution.

 

[Sam Posten]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ted Todorov

Quote:

Yes.

The article you linked says "by the end of 2010". The next iPhone is coming in June -- there will be no LTE coverage to speak of then. Everybody will start screaming at Apple that 4G is false advertising, that the iPhone is a toy -- you know the drill.

I think you underestimate the opportunities for growth here. There are two major drivers for growth as I see them, Verizon availability and continued inroads into corporate culture.
http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2010/03/24/apple-how-the-iphone-target-market-can-expand-7x/

And Apple could position it as a technology that will grow over that year. Think of the differences between how Apple approached USB/Firewire vice Bluray. When they REALLY push something they will push it before people even know they want it and before any other devices support it, and if they ignore something they REALLY ignore it, to the point of telling you why it sucks, even if they are on the board of directors for it.

And also, Verizon reconfirmed their commitment to growing LTE THIS YEAR. This year LTE on verizon could be nearly as big as 3G on AT&T.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/24/verizon-to-blanket-one-third-of-america-with-lte-this-year-do/
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/apple-job-posting-hints-lte-powering-a-future-iphone/

Smart Phones might be confirmed for early next year tho:
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/24/verizon-talks-commercial-lte-deployment-details-data-devices-fi/
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/24/verizon-wireless-all-4g-wwan-devices-will-support-3g-too/
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/24/verizon-wrapping-up-boston-and-seattle-trials-friendly-user/

I'm just saying it's not an impossibility. Improbable yes. But not out of the question.

 

[Joseph Bolus]

According to this article It looks like [SIZE= larger]the new iPhone *will* run on Verizon's network, after all[/SIZE]
Here's the pertinent quote from the article:

"The new iPhone would work on a type of wireless network called CDMA, these people said. CDMA is used by Verizon Wireless, AT&T's main competitor, as well as Sprint Nextel Corp. and a handful of cellular operators in countries including South Korea and Japan. The vast majority of carriers world-wide, including AT&T, use another technology called GSM.

With Apple developing a phone with CDMA capability, its exclusive U.S. arrangement with AT&T dating to 2007 appears set to end."

 

[DaveF]

How accurate has the WSJ been on past rumors?

 

[Ted Todorov]

John Gruber already called BS on the WSJ:
[SIZE= smaller]"WSJ’s Lame Entry in the iPhone Rumors Game [/SIZE][SIZE= smaller]★[/SIZE][SIZE= smaller]The Wall Street Journal:[/SIZE] [SIZE= smaller]Apple Inc. is developing a new iPhone to debut this summer and also appears to be working on a model for U.S. mobile phone operator Verizon Wireless, say people briefed on the matter.[/SIZE] [SIZE= smaller]Keep in mind there’s a big difference between “is” and “appears to be”. And they have no actual details of the next-generation iPhone. Nothing. Not the A4-family CPU system-on-a-chip. Not the 960 × 640 double-resolution display. Not the second front-facing camera. Not even the third-party multitasking in iPhone OS 4. All they have is that there’s going to be a new iPhone this summer, period. Thanks for the scoop, Yukari Iwatani Kane."

So, don't hold your breath for a Verizon iPhone. The key word here is "appears". [/SIZE]