iPhone iPhone iPhone!

[The Kernel]

Played with one last night for an hour or so. Don't know if it is just my fat fingers, but I couldn't use the keyboard worth shit. It's an incredibly sexy design though, and there are some nice features, but I couldn't get over four points:

1) As I mentioned, the keyboard stinks. Damien tells me that isn't the case for him, but it was certainly the case for me, my girlfriend and my girlfriend's dad. Worse the screen itself was totally unresponsive half the time. Totally killed my ability to use the thing.

2) On every other phone in existence that I've used, the phone part is always a single button away. Apple buries it in the main menu and I hate it. It's a phone first dammit!

3) The UI is sexy and flashy, but it doesn't hold a candle to my Blackberry in utility of major functions. This is Apple's first phone though so I'm sure they'll get it right eventually, but for now the UI leaves me scratching my head at times.

4) The EDGE network is slow. Period.

[The Kernel]

Every BlackBerry gets e-mail through EDGE. Seems good enough for them. If you want to do serious surfing, just connect to a WiFi hot spot.

Oh for fuck's sake, the Blackberry is an optimized push email machine, it doesn't need 3G for that unless you are serious about dealing with attachments (which is a new feature on Blackberries and nobody uses it). The iPhone is a media powerhouse, the decision not to include 3G support is LAME BRAINED. Not to mention that a Blackberry is optimized for WAP BROWSING not full blown web browsing!

And Wi-Fi is a ridiculous mechanism to use in a phone. It SOUNDS great, but I've had smartphones for years with Wi-Fi that I never use because it is way too much of a hassle to deal with managing the connection, plus the power drain isn't great either.

Why can't you just admit that the decision not to include 3G (a feature that is in dumb phones that are years old) is a stupid one? All the content heavy MVNOs on the market are 3G only (checked out a Helio lately?) and content delivery doesn't make a lick of sense without 3G at a minimum. Given the iPhone and Apple's iTunes Store plus the YouTube thing, not including 3G is sort of like equipping the HMS Victory with oars instead of a sail.

That's the theoretical max. In reality, it's very slow. But apparently, AT&T has been seriously upgrading their EDGE network according to reports. People have reported download speeds of around 200 kbps, which isn't bad at all.

AT&T is not going to invest serious money in EDGE upgrades as there is nothing in it for them to do so. They dropped the ball on 3G for the most part (a much smaller percentage of their customers use HSPDA than say EV-DO) and AT&T is feeling the pain of this because 3G data plan customers are a huge cash cow.

And yes, EDGE is very slow for anything that you want to do on the iPhone.

[ray245]

Uh, no. You said "people from Apple", and unless someone else on this board works there, you were referring to me.

Oh...so it's you...anyway, can't remember who's working for apple. I am feeling a little bit annoyed by apple trying to say their products is comparable with other companies product even thought apple’s product are much more expensive. It’s like saying a normal Toyota is comparable with a BMW and using that analogy, apple tries to tell people that apple is better than a PC, and somehow forget to tell the public that a Mac is more expensive as well. (yes, I know this is getting a little off-topic). This time however, I find that the iphone cannot be justified by the price.

...And? Everyone's marketing does that.

So stop trying to act that apple is more morally superior to microsoft.

I'm not even sure what this means.

Don't bother to figure me out...It'll just hurt your brain.

[Resinence]

apple tries to tell people that apple is better than a PC, and somehow forget to tell the public that a Mac is more expensive as well.

Apple iMac

Dell Desktop

Looks about the same to me.

So stop trying to act that apple is more morally superior to microsoft.

They are. For now anyway. What has microsoft done for the computer community lately? Oh right, try to get company's to pay protection money or get sued for vapourware patent claims. Whereas apple releases tons of source code all the time.

http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html

[General Zod]

So stop trying to act that apple is more morally superior to microsoft.

Do you actually have any, I dunno, real examples to back up this retarded claim? Maybe it's just me but I don't see anyone in this thread acting the way you're claiming. Of course you'll probably just ignore this demand for proof, but oh well.

[Durandal]

I've got a quick question about this here Iphone. Does/can it do all the things that blackberrys do?

No.

Only those who had been employees for over a year for what I read. Still it implyed a 12 million dollars expense

All full-time employees get one. Part-time employees who've been employed for over a year do as well. But we'll likely be getting our free ones around the end of July. I was walking by the Palo Alto Apple Store and just said "Fuck it", went in and bought one. It took me about 15 minutes. I figure I'll sell the free one on eBay or something. Either way, by the time I have to pay the bill for it on my credit card, I'll have made the money back.

Nope, battery life and quality apple hardware (and a decent processor) as well as 8GB of storage...

Software plays a major role in battery life. If you removed the iPhone's OS and replaced it with an open source OS, your battery life would almost certainly be markedly less.

4) The EDGE network is slow. Period.

Yeah it's slow, but it's not the glacial slowness everyone was describing when I used it. I could browse my usual repertoire of sites, and the Google Maps app was shockingly usable. And e-mail was just fine.

Oh for fuck's sake, the Blackberry is an optimized push email machine, it doesn't need 3G for that unless you are serious about dealing with attachments (which is a new feature on Blackberries and nobody uses it). The iPhone is a media powerhouse, the decision not to include 3G support is LAME BRAINED. Not to mention that a Blackberry is optimized for WAP BROWSING not full blown web browsing!

All right then. I'm sure you'll apply for a job here so you can tell our lame-brained hardware engineers how to keep the current level of battery life and phone dimensions with a 3G chip inside. Believe it or not, some people who work at Apple actually do know what they're doing, and there are reasons behind the decisions that get made which go beyond "Steve Jobs is an idiot, and he just likes to do stupid things completely at random."

And Wi-Fi is a ridiculous mechanism to use in a phone.

You're right, as far as the scope of WAP-browsing phones go. But the iPhone just has a regular web browser, so WiFi makes perfect sense.

It SOUNDS great, but I've had smartphones for years with Wi-Fi that I never use because it is way too much of a hassle to deal with managing the connection, plus the power drain isn't great either.

I was browsing around using WiFi for a good 2 or 3 hours last night, and the battery life dipped to about half. This was along with a slew of other shit like watching YouTube videos, movie trailers, SMS messaging, etc ... Once the WiFi connection is set up, there's no managing the connection. It'll just connect if WiFi is there and use EDGE if it's not. I'm not sure what more you could ask for.

Why can't you just admit that the decision not to include 3G (a feature that is in dumb phones that are years old) is a stupid one? All the content heavy MVNOs on the market are 3G only (checked out a Helio lately?) and content delivery doesn't make a lick of sense without 3G at a minimum. Given the iPhone and Apple's iTunes Store plus the YouTube thing, not including 3G is sort of like equipping the HMS Victory with oars instead of a sail.

I'd like 3G on the iPhone, but I can certainly understand why it wasn't included in the first revision because of chip sizes and power consumption. Besides, it just doesn't have the coverage that EDGE does. EDGE is everywhere. Yes, it's slow everywhere, but it's there.

AT&T's 3G has good coverage in major metropolitan areas, but from the maps I'm seeing, it's non-existent outside of those. In this state, there's no 3G coverage at all further South than San Jose until you get to LA, and even there it's fragmented. And just out of curiosity, I checked the 3G coverage over my old school in central Illinois. Nothing. Nada.

AT&T is not going to invest serious money in EDGE upgrades as there is nothing in it for them to do so.

You can prognosticate all you want about what you think they'll do, but they did something to the EDGE network, according to numerous reports of faster speeds yesterday.

They dropped the ball on 3G for the most part (a much smaller percentage of their customers use HSPDA than say EV-DO) and AT&T is feeling the pain of this because 3G data plan customers are a huge cash cow.

And yes, EDGE is very slow for anything that you want to do on the iPhone.

When everyone was talking about how terrible EDGE was, I was actually expecting worse than dial-up speeds. I was pleasantly surprised. Granted, connecting to a WiFi network is still like a whole other world, but EDGE is usable.

Oh...so it's you...anyway, can't remember who's working for apple. I am feeling a little bit annoyed by apple trying to say their products is comparable with other companies product even thought apple’s product are much more expensive.

I wasn't aware that price was the sole criterion when comparing products.

So stop trying to act that apple is more morally superior to microsoft.

... Is English not your first language?

Don't bother to figure me out...It'll just hurt your brain.

I imagine it would, in the same way that trying to figure out Michael Jackson's various neuroses would.

This thread is not about whether Macs are better than PCs or whether Apple's products are more expensive. Please don't feed the troll.

[Oberleutnant]

You said it [having a built-in Ipod -OL] was useless.

Ah, miscommunication between us then. By "useless" I originally referred to not being able properly use iPhone's Internet-related and connection-dependent features on ordinary GSM alone.

No, but the throngs of people who lined up to buy one correlates to phone business.

True enough. If there is one thing for which Apple has a knack for, it's their branding. Their ability to foster a strong emotional rapport between customers and their products in umatched in the world of digital equipment. Apple understands where their real brand strength lies, and iPhone definitely capitalizes on this. During the spring, the grassroots buzz in the internet about iPhone did all the needed hype, not their marketing department.

I was thinking of iPhone's positioning in the market in general. I don't think there actually isn't a similar phone out there in the high-end segment. It seems to me that iPhone has quickly carved itself its own niche, which might grow into something big.

Why they were originally thinking of marketing it as a phone for business and IT professionals, I don't quite understand. At least for now, it's not compatible with various business software, security seems lacking, system is closed, etc. For young(ish) urban trendsetters, who are not too tech-savy or keen to fiddle around with settings, it's probably an excellent choice because it's so easy to use.

Yeah, and? A hard drive music player wasn't anything new when the iPod came out.

Again, it was just a general comment about the iPhone craze in general, as there are plenty of people out there, who think it's the first mobile phone ever to be able to play music. That's not Apple's fault, however. Quite the opposite: Nokia, Samsung and Motorola should take a heed and learn something about how to market a technology-intensive product to general populace. Apple obviously knows to how to approach them, as it proved itself already with iPod.

That's the theoretical max. In reality, it's very slow. But apparently, AT&T has been seriously upgrading their EDGE network according to reports. People have reported download speeds of around 200 kbps, which isn't bad at all.

Ok. Apparently we have something like EDGE here as well, but practically everyone who uses his or her phone for something else than just calling and SMS has made a direct switch to 3G.

Overall, iPhone is a very US-centric product (and I don't intend this in a negative way). Everything from its features to Apple's distribution and partnership deals with telecommunications operators are specifically tuned for USA, where the market situation is remarkably different in comparison with Asia or Europe. Apple is also far more established and popular in USA, so no wonder. It'll be interesting to see how differently Apple enters the European market with iPhone.

[salm]

Meh, come back when you can fit a reasonable projector in there.

[Durandal]

Why they were originally thinking of marketing it as a phone for business and IT professionals, I don't quite understand. At least for now, it's not compatible with various business software, security seems lacking, system is closed, etc. For young(ish) urban trendsetters, who are not too tech-savy or keen to fiddle around with settings, it's probably an excellent choice because it's so easy to use.

I don't think it was ever marketed as a business phone; the existing business phones were just the closest comparison points. The iPhone isn't going to be methadone for the CrackBerry. It's for people like me, who don't need all the business-centric buzzword support but want a nicely-phone that doesn't suck. The iPhone fits the bill. It has excellent media offerings, support for WiFi, great e-mail, web browsing, makes a great iPod, etc ... The downside is that you have to be able to afford it. But if it takes off, then prices will drop.

Ok. Apparently we have something like EDGE here as well, but practically everyone who uses his or her phone for something else than just calling and SMS has made a direct switch to 3G.

That's because Europe's 3G coverage is fantastic. Europe has always been way ahead of the US in cellular technology in general.

Overall, iPhone is a very US-centric product (and I don't intend this in a negative way). Everything from its features to Apple's distribution and partnership deals with telecommunications operators are specifically tuned for USA, where the market situation is remarkably different in comparison with Asia or Europe. Apple is also far more established and popular in USA, so no wonder. It'll be interesting to see how differently Apple enters the European market with iPhone.

The big issue I see is that what Apple's doing with AT&T is illegal in most of the first-world. There will have to exist an unlocked iPhone in order for it to sell in the EU. And European customers aren't as conditioned to deal with ultra-shitty phones as US customers are, so there might not be the same level of dissatisfaction with the current offerings.

[Netko]

The big issue I see is that what Apple's doing with AT&T is illegal in most of the first-world. There will have to exist an unlocked iPhone in order for it to sell in the EU. And European customers aren't as conditioned to deal with ultra-shitty phones as US customers are, so there might not be the same level of dissatisfaction with the current offerings.

Plus the whole dictionary-corrected input I keep harping about. In Europe with 20+ languages its going to be a whole other matter then US with English plus possibly Spanish and maybe one or two other. The first reports of the software keyboard not really being revolutionary compared to other such offerings (which are very imprecise) like from Kernel here are not lessening my concerns in that regard.

[The Kernel]

All right then. I'm sure you'll apply for a job here so you can tell our lame-brained hardware engineers how to keep the current level of battery life and phone dimensions with a 3G chip inside. Believe it or not, some people who work at Apple actually do know what they're doing, and there are reasons behind the decisions that get made which go beyond "Steve Jobs is an idiot, and he just likes to do stupid things completely at random."

Don't make wild guesses about hardware. Broadcom has been shipping their single chip HSDPA compatible solutions for a while now and they consume about the same power levels as EDGE radio chips.

BTW, the 802.11b transceiver inside the iPhones sucks down a lot more power than a 3G radio will.

You're right, as far as the scope of WAP-browsing phones go. But the iPhone just has a regular web browser, so WiFi makes perfect sense.

No it doesn't. One of the great things about 3G is that it just works. Even with free public Wi-Fi spots at the airport I will always use my EV-DO card on my laptop because it just connects and doesn't make you go through the hassle of dealing with the range and configuration bullshit of Wi-Fi.

I was browsing around using WiFi for a good 2 or 3 hours last night, and the battery life dipped to about half. This was along with a slew of other shit like watching YouTube videos, movie trailers, SMS messaging, etc ... Once the WiFi connection is set up, there's no managing the connection. It'll just connect if WiFi is there and use EDGE if it's not. I'm not sure what more you could ask for.

It's a mobile phone, the point is to use it when you are on the go, not sitting at home (that's what your computer is for). As such, it's not just a single configuration with a Wi-Fi network, you need to configure it EVERY SINGLE TIME you connect in a new place.

Face it, 3G is vastly superior to Wi-Fi for mobile high speed networking. This isn't surprising AT ALL considering that Wi-Fi wasn't even designed for that purpose.

I'd like 3G on the iPhone, but I can certainly understand why it wasn't included in the first revision because of chip sizes and power consumption.

Both are bullshit reasons with single chip HSDPA chips widely available.

Besides, it just doesn't have the coverage that EDGE does. EDGE is everywhere. Yes, it's slow everywhere, but it's there.

AT&T's 3G has good coverage in major metropolitan areas, but from the maps I'm seeing, it's non-existent outside of those. In this state, there's no 3G coverage at all further South than San Jose until you get to LA, and even there it's fragmented. And just out of curiosity, I checked the 3G coverage over my old school in central Illinois. Nothing. Nada.

It is concentrated around population density, which is exactly as it should be. And this argument avails you nothing considering that supporting 3G doesn't mean that you don't support EDGE, it just means that you ALSO support 3G where available. And even on AT&T, 3G is plenty available in high density cities and suburbs.

You can prognosticate all you want about what you think they'll do, but they did something to the EDGE network, according to numerous reports of faster speeds yesterday.

Oh, I see what they've done. They aren't deploying new hardware, they are just removing existing caps on bandwidth. That's certainly nice, but doesn't obviate the need for 3G.

When everyone was talking about how terrible EDGE was, I was actually expecting worse than dial-up speeds. I was pleasantly surprised. Granted, connecting to a WiFi network is still like a whole other world, but EDGE is usable.

Usable for a device that relies on media features? I can live with it on my Blackberry because I don't need much bandwidth, but if I bought an iPhone I expect the media services to be snappier than on a low end AT&T device.

Face it, right now watching media on an LG CU500 is superior to doing it on the iPhone and that's SAD.

[Durandal]

Don't make wild guesses about hardware. Broadcom has been shipping their single chip HSDPA compatible solutions for a while now and they consume about the same power levels as EDGE radio chips.

Really? Because I don't see any power drain specifications on Broadcom's product briefs of their 2G and 3G chips. Just "lowest power utilization". In fact, I can't find any information about power the consumption of EDGE chips versus 3G, except anecdotal reports from other smart phone users saying that enabling 3G kills their battery life.

BTW, the 802.11b transceiver inside the iPhones sucks down a lot more power than a 3G radio will.

WiFi isn't a negotiable feature on the iPhone. I don't really know what the long-term strategy is, but the whole "digital hub" concept involves all of your devices being able to connect to your home network and work together through it. That can't happen with just EDGE or just 3G.

No it doesn't. One of the great things about 3G is that it just works. Even with free public Wi-Fi spots at the airport I will always use my EV-DO card on my laptop because it just connects and doesn't make you go through the hassle of dealing with the range and configuration bullshit of Wi-Fi.

WiFi works just fine at home or in your office or at a friend's house or whatever. As I said before, I'd bet that the main reason it's there is so that the iPhone can relay content to and display content from other machines on the same network.

It's a mobile phone, the point is to use it when you are on the go, not sitting at home (that's what your computer is for). As such, it's not just a single configuration with a Wi-Fi network, you need to configure it EVERY SINGLE TIME you connect in a new place.

Yeah ... and then there is no configuration after that. WiFi networks aren't psychic. 3G is nice, but if you need Internet access everywhere, EDGE is what you need.

Face it, 3G is vastly superior to Wi-Fi for mobile high speed networking. This isn't surprising AT ALL considering that Wi-Fi wasn't even designed for that purpose.

This isn't a comparison between WiFi and 3G. WiFi would exist on the iPhone whether it used 3G or EDGE for its cellular Internet service and for good reason. You may not think it's a good reason, but it's part of a strategy that's been working very well for Apple.

It is concentrated around population density, which is exactly as it should be.

And EDGE is concentrated ... everywhere.

And this argument avails you nothing considering that supporting 3G doesn't mean that you don't support EDGE, it just means that you ALSO support 3G where available. And even on AT&T, 3G is plenty available in high density cities and suburbs.

But as you noted earlier today, AT&T doesn't like 3G all that much.

Oh, I see what they've done. They aren't deploying new hardware, they are just removing existing caps on bandwidth. That's certainly nice, but doesn't obviate the need for 3G.

No, but it makes EDGE more tolerable.

Usable for a device that relies on media features? I can live with it on my Blackberry because I don't need much bandwidth, but if I bought an iPhone I expect the media services to be snappier than on a low end AT&T device.

If the iPhone relies on anything, it's the UI. The media features center around photo browsing and iPod functionality, both of which deal with local content.

[Lisa]

In regards to the WiFi, one reason I did not get the Treo 650 when I bought my last phone was because it didn't have WiFi support and my carrier required me to sign up for an expensive data plan in order to surf the net, sms or anything that my current samsung a920 would do for 20$ a month.

WiFi is something I'd want in a smart phone. Am I planning on getting an iPhone? no, even if it was available here my current phone works fine and my back up phone works fine and I'm not going to sign up for more contract with Bell.

[Durandal]

Just for shits and giggles, here's my iPhone wallpaper.

[Praxis]

Here we go again...with people from apple keep on saying they are just the best company out there, and is not evil like microsoft.

Who said that?

Anyways the iPhone is "evil" incarnate since the second Bell Reich (the "new" AT&T) exclusively provides telecommunications service for it

A post on:
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/fast-and-fur ... 267899.php

It is in fact perfectly legal, according to a recent decision from the U.S. Register of Copyrights, for American consumers to unlock their phones for use on whatever network they would like. Apple is trying to take away that right by locking the iPhone to AT&T's network.

Has anyone else heard about anything like this?

EVERYONE locks their phones to individual networks. Apple's not taking away the right; Apple is one of a billion. I can't see how anyone can reasonably blame apple.

[The Kernel]

Really? Because I don't see any power drain specifications on Broadcom's product briefs of their 2G and 3G chips. Just "lowest power utilization". In fact, I can't find any information about power the consumption of EDGE chips versus 3G, except anecdotal reports from other smart phone users saying that enabling 3G kills their battery life.

In old multi-chip solutions that MIGHT have been true, this is not the case anymore. Single chip solutions like the Broadcom BCM2152 make the extra power drain negligible.

Furthermore, how do you explain the excellent power numbers of devices that run on Helio? This is a mandatory 3G carrier and ALL of their devices are in line with battery life of other carriers. Please explain how you would account for this.

I don't know why it is so hard for Apple fans to accept that 3G might not be in the iPhone for business reasons instead of technical reasons.

WiFi isn't a negotiable feature on the iPhone. I don't really know what the long-term strategy is, but the whole "digital hub" concept involves all of your devices being able to connect to your home network and work together through it. That can't happen with just EDGE or just 3G.

I'm not seriously suggesting there is a need to cut Wi-Fi out actually, just that it isn't nearly as useful as 3G to a data centric device. You can actually include both for a negligible power drain (the BCM2152 for example supports Wi-Fi and 3G in a single chip).

WiFi works just fine at home or in your office or at a friend's house or whatever. As I said before, I'd bet that the main reason it's there is so that the iPhone can relay content to and display content from other machines on the same network.

I can't believe you are still arguing about this after the hassle you went through this weekend with your iPhone and the lack of 3G. You STILL think not having 3G isn't a big deal?

Yeah ... and then there is no configuration after that. WiFi networks aren't psychic. 3G is nice, but if you need Internet access everywhere, EDGE is what you need.

Edge is not mutually exclusive with 3G.

This isn't a comparison between WiFi and 3G. WiFi would exist on the iPhone whether it used 3G or EDGE for its cellular Internet service and for good reason. You may not think it's a good reason, but it's part of a strategy that's been working very well for Apple.

I agree, but I see no reason to not include both. It isn't power, heat, size or even cost. The real reason it isn't there is almost definitely for business reasons.

But as you noted earlier today, AT&T doesn't like 3G all that much.

Nope, which is probably the real reason it isn't in the iPhone. AT&T has zero desire to build up a 3G network after letting theirs lag for so many years.

If the iPhone relies on anything, it's the UI. The media features center around photo browsing and iPod functionality, both of which deal with local content.

And why can't you purchase digital content from the iTunes store on your device? Oh that's right, because it's FUCKING IMPOSSIBLE over EDGE but would be a snap on 3G.

[Durandal]

Just a heads up, the iPhone isn't supported on 64-bit versions of Windows.

[The Jester]

EDGE? I had never heard of this until now.

EDGE is occasionally referred to as 2.5 G in the industry. EDGE networks were rolled out primarily for operators that were have difficulties in obtaining (expensive) 3G licenses (UMTS). They're not very common worldwide as they're very expensive for operators.

The data rates for EDGE are significantly lower than for 3G (especially when High Speed Packet Access is enabled). EDGE lacks a number of features of 3G which improve overall performance in various and changing radio environments.

People have reported download speeds of around 200 kbps, which isn't bad at all.

That would have to be under very ideal conditions: right next to a base transmitter station and very little other traffic within the cell. Given a phone with HSPA and similar conditions and you're likely to see around 3 Mbps.

I am guessing that the omission of 3G from the iPhone is because Apple simply lack the technical expertise for the moment and were unwilling to commit the resources in the meantime and so decided to focus primarily on the American market for the meantime.

[lukexcom]

It appears that the half-million iPhones simultaneously YouTubing may have caused AT&T to flip over and croak. A few people around here and I have not been able to sync phones (AT&T/Cingular 8525 myself) to our exchange servers or surf the net over AT&T for the past hour now, and the east-coast is just hitting prime-time.

The occasional page or request does get through, maybe once every few minutes.

Well, I guess I'll just hook up to the company's wireless network instead.

Anybody else experiencing data issues with AT&T? I don't think Minneapolis, MN ever got a 3G network from Cingular, but right now the GPRS here is unbearable.

[The Kernel]

The entire EDGE network on the west coast went down. Steve predicted this didn't he?

[Praxis]

Just a heads up, the iPhone isn't supported on 64-bit versions of Windows.

People actually use that? Didn't it have, like, five billion application/driver incompatabilities?

The only people I know with Windows XP x64 are the web developers for my company. I know this because I discovered I couldn't remotely push software updates to their machine as the client end of Microsoft Systems Management Server won't even install on it.

[Praxis]

I am guessing that the omission of 3G from the iPhone is because Apple simply lack the technical expertise for the moment and were unwilling to commit the resources in the meantime and so decided to focus primarily on the American market for the meantime.

Alternate theory for you. Apple tried to go to other phone companies like Verizon, and all of them refused to allow Apple to control pricing and dataplans and deployment and refused to change their services just for Apple (see Visual Voicemail), except Cingular, so Apple went with Cingular. Cingular's 3G network has TERRIBLE coverage and 3G takes more battery power, so Apple went with EDGE.

[Dark Hellion]

Sorry to break up the geeky tech talk, but I have a few, admittedly dumb questions.

When abouts could we expect an Iphone with GPS (I want GPS so if I have to call 911 after getting shot at work they can find me) for under $200-$250? I am expecting a couple years, but that's ok.

And how well does the current iphone interface with macs/macbooks. What options and features does this open?

Thanks.

[General Zod]

Sorry to break up the geeky tech talk, but I have a few, admittedly dumb questions.

When abouts could we expect an Iphone with GPS (I want GPS so if I have to call 911 after getting shot at work they can find me) for under $200-$250? I am expecting a couple years, but that's ok.

Cingular already has a service to allow 911 to track cell phones that place calls to their service so rescue workers can better find them. It wouldn't be too surprising if iPhones already had this capability.

[phongn]

Sorry to break up the geeky tech talk, but I have a few, admittedly dumb questions.

When abouts could we expect an Iphone with GPS (I want GPS so if I have to call 911 after getting shot at work they can find me) for under $200-$250? I am expecting a couple years, but that's ok.

Your position can be triangulated by the network so that's pretty good, but GPS iPhone for $200? Probably not. Apple is going for the high-end of the market.