6 ms·

This is ridiculous. The iPhone 5 failing to wow everybody is more a symptom of the fact that there's really just not much more a smartphone can, or really shoul

This is ridiculous. The iPhone 5 failing to wow everybody is more a symptom of the fact that there's really just not much more a smartphone can, or really should do. I hear people lamenting things like the fact that they won't be able to wirelessly charge the iPhone 5. Really? Placing your phone on top of a wired brick instead of inserting a wire is the next big thing? Please. Smartphones will continue to get faster and have longer battery life, but everyone should stop holding their breath for an announcement as revolutionary as the original iPhone's was.

bnegreve 14y ago
What was revolutionary in the original iphone ?
- marknutter 14y ago
  It was the smart phone that the average consumer actually wanted to buy.
- zuppy 14y ago
  finger based touch screen, a decent web browser, a different ui, etc.
- forgottenpaswrd 14y ago
  1- Before Iphone, telcom companies would decide what software comes in on a phone and what does not, and it was a political decision, or based on how much you paid the telcom. Say you had a game and wanted to sell like you do on the App Store. The Telcoms would say: sure,we give you $200 for the game property and all rights, including exclusivity, consider yourself fortunate for us letting you in. Take it or leave it but we control the channel. 2- Internet browsing was possible in a phone for the first time. Only Nokia had something similar, albeit much harder to navigate but again the Telcoms will force wifi to be removed so you had to pay them more. 3- Google maps on a phone was fantastic, again only Nokia maps could compete. Easier gmail.(At the time Apple and Google were best pals). 4-Smooth interface, 0 delay, instantaneous feedback, you hold an icon and it moves without flickering and jumping. You could zoom in a natural and continuous way instead of steps for the first time on a phone. 5-All the interface controlled with one button and the screen, with the UI designed for it. This was so revolutionary on a phone, as "people love so much to press keys" like blackberry said. How easy people forget.
  - justinschuh 14y ago
    How easily people forget. 1. The App Store didn't show up until the 3G; whereas Java ME and Win Mobile apps had been around for years. You could install your own Java ME or Windows Mobile apps without going through the carrier; whereas Apple really does control the whole channel on iOS. That stated, smartphone apps prior to the iPhone 3G tended to miss the mark with respect to convenience, quality, and ubiquity. 2. The iPhone probably was the first phone with a decent browser. Their UX was quite good, and definitely took advantage of the recent evolution in the available hardware (e.g. large, capacitive multi-touch screens). 3. The iPhone didn't have GPS until the 3G. That and other missing features were major complaints about the first release. 4. The interface really wasn't smooth at all until probably the 3GS. The 3G and below were randomly jittery and jumpy, but that's understandable given the extent to which they were pushing the envelope on the hardware of the day. 5. Yes, the iPhone was the first mass-market phone with a UX that really took advantage of a large capacitive multi-touch screen. However, Apple certainly didn't create those screens, or produce the first devices to use them. They did, however, make the first broadly successful device built on that technology, employing a combination of solid design and very aggressive marketing. But it's misleading to claim that others in the industry weren't already moving in that direction as well.
    - marknutter 14y ago
      I was waiting for the "it's all marketing" argument to appear and I was not disappointed.
      - justinschuh 14y ago
        You obviously replied to the wrong comment, or simply read nothing that I wrote.
s_henry_paulson 14y ago
It's not so much that users want/need the features you describe, but it's the lack of something... anything ... spectacularly new that is what is opening the door for the competition. I've had more iPhones than I can count dating back to the first launch, and I'm sure I'm not the only one that's going to be checking out the Luminas soon.. not because I don't like the iPhone, but rather looking at change just for the sake of doing something different. (to coin a phrase)
- marknutter 14y ago
  > but rather looking at change just for the sake of doing something different I think this is a geek thing. Non-techies aren't always looking for the latest and greatest beyond the next whole number attached to their brand of choice.
simplexion 14y ago
I am tired of hearing this myth that the first iPhone was so revolutionary. That is completely ignoring that the LG Prada was released prior to it. The iPhone didn't do anything new. You could buy a Nokia phone at the time that did all the iPhone did and some. The iPhone couldn't copy and paste, MMS and a bunch of other basic things that other phones at the time could.
- marknutter 14y ago
  Well, without getting into an argument about what exactly made the iPhone revolutionary in terms of features and design, I think the evidence is clear: average people didn't buy smartphones before the iPhone came out, they did after it came out. Now every phone looks like an iPhone. Sounds revolutionary to me, in every sense of the word.
  - simplexion 14y ago
    Touchscreen does not make a smartphone. Plenty of people had non-touchscreen smartphones prior to the iPhone.
- czr80 14y ago
  Indeed, it was nothing new, brought out by a company that knew nothing about phones. No wonder it bombed so badly. Nearly destroyed Apple - they sure won't make that mistake again.
- panacea 14y ago
  It was the first iPod with mobile Safari that worked really well as a browser (it also made phonecalls). It was fucking revolutionary and the numbers speak for themselves.
- _djo_ 14y ago
  Anybody saying the LG Prada is proof that the iPhone was not revolutionary has clearly never used an LG Prada. It was not a good phone. The mere fact that nearly every smartphone on the market today has the same form factor as the iPhone and follows a similar UI paradigm should be evidence enough of the iPhone's impact. I see no reason to deny that.
cbr 14y ago
> there's really just not much more a smartphone can, or really should do Really? What about: * haptic feedback as a 2d surface? http://senseg.com/ http://senseg.com/ * replacing all the cards you carry in your wallet (NFC) * going a week on a charge * predictive modeling where your phone preloads webpages/directions/music that it thinks you're going to need I suspect your comment will seem obviously wrong in five years.
- marknutter 14y ago
  haptic feedback? I only ever hear geeks asking for that feature, and it's YEARS off. NFC will only be as useful as the number of vendors who adopt it. Yes, increasing battery life significantly will always be a killer feature, but that's obvious. Predictive modeling sounds like software to me, and I'm talking about hardware features.
- onetimeuse001 14y ago
  "I suspect your comment will seem obviously wrong in five years." I suspect your comment too will seem obviously wrong in sixty-five years. Geez
bryanlarsen 14y ago
For myself, Android phones have 2 major features that I would sorely miss if I switched to iPhone 5: - a 4.7 inch screen is almost 50% larger than a 4.0 inch screen - transit integration with maps As far as I can tell, the only thing that I would gain by switching to an iPhone would be a CBC music app that doesn't suck. But your basic point is correct: we've reached the point of diminishing returns. Any high end iPhone or Android phone is "good enough" and the differences between them are not worth the time or effort that most people put into them. Here's my buying advice for smartphones. If you already have one and want to upgrade, buy one of the same kind. The pain of switching ecosystems is far greater than any benefit you'll get from switching. If you don't already have a smartphone, buy one similar to what your friends use. The benefit you get from a shared ecosystem far outweighs any difference between phones.
- marknutter 14y ago
  That's solid advice. As for transit info, that did exist until Apple ditched Google Maps, but Google will release a dedicated app for Maps and all will be right with the world again.
  - gonzo 14y ago
    Google's app could also be a supplier of transit info for the built-in (Apple) Maps application.
- ebrenes 14y ago
  I'm the opposite, I've been yearning for an even thinner phone. And now that the new one has a unibody aluminum case I won't feel so compelled to fit a rubber bumper around it. Also my current phone, the iphone 4s, feels a bit short, so I could see the increased length working better when talking on it. Just for those form factor features alone I'd gladly switch to the iPhone 5.
dagw 14y ago
I hear people lamenting things like the fact that they won't be able to wirelessly charge the iPhone 5 I suspect Apple is holding off on wireless charging until they can get all their ducks in a line as it where. Placing your phone on a brick isn't a huge win compared to pugging your phone in. Placing your iPhone, Macbook, iPad and any other battery powered Apple device anywhere on your desk (or at least a large part of your desk) and having them automatically charge would be a pretty huge win.
- isleyaardvark 14y ago
  Apple is holding off on wireless charging until wireless charging is more common. Phil Schiller has said as much. You still have to plug in the charger itself. Whereas with USB you can plug it directly into laptops and it's also offered in many other devices (monitors, car stereos, airplanes). And this avoids trying to engineer two different charging methods. Apple would still have to offer USB charging, they're not going to force all iPhone users to buy a wireless charging station, not yet.

bnegreve 14y ago

What was revolutionary in the original iphone ?

marknutter 14y ago
It was the smart phone that the average consumer actually wanted to buy.
zuppy 14y ago
finger based touch screen, a decent web browser, a different ui, etc.
forgottenpaswrd 14y ago
1- Before Iphone, telcom companies would decide what software comes in on a phone and what does not, and it was a political decision, or based on how much you paid the telcom. Say you had a game and wanted to sell like you do on the App Store. The Telcoms would say: sure,we give you $200 for the game property and all rights, including exclusivity, consider yourself fortunate for us letting you in. Take it or leave it but we control the channel. 2- Internet browsing was possible in a phone for the first time. Only Nokia had something similar, albeit much harder to navigate but again the Telcoms will force wifi to be removed so you had to pay them more. 3- Google maps on a phone was fantastic, again only Nokia maps could compete. Easier gmail.(At the time Apple and Google were best pals). 4-Smooth interface, 0 delay, instantaneous feedback, you hold an icon and it moves without flickering and jumping. You could zoom in a natural and continuous way instead of steps for the first time on a phone. 5-All the interface controlled with one button and the screen, with the UI designed for it. This was so revolutionary on a phone, as "people love so much to press keys" like blackberry said. How easy people forget.
- justinschuh 14y ago
  How easily people forget. 1. The App Store didn't show up until the 3G; whereas Java ME and Win Mobile apps had been around for years. You could install your own Java ME or Windows Mobile apps without going through the carrier; whereas Apple really does control the whole channel on iOS. That stated, smartphone apps prior to the iPhone 3G tended to miss the mark with respect to convenience, quality, and ubiquity. 2. The iPhone probably was the first phone with a decent browser. Their UX was quite good, and definitely took advantage of the recent evolution in the available hardware (e.g. large, capacitive multi-touch screens). 3. The iPhone didn't have GPS until the 3G. That and other missing features were major complaints about the first release. 4. The interface really wasn't smooth at all until probably the 3GS. The 3G and below were randomly jittery and jumpy, but that's understandable given the extent to which they were pushing the envelope on the hardware of the day. 5. Yes, the iPhone was the first mass-market phone with a UX that really took advantage of a large capacitive multi-touch screen. However, Apple certainly didn't create those screens, or produce the first devices to use them. They did, however, make the first broadly successful device built on that technology, employing a combination of solid design and very aggressive marketing. But it's misleading to claim that others in the industry weren't already moving in that direction as well.
  - marknutter 14y ago
    I was waiting for the "it's all marketing" argument to appear and I was not disappointed.
    - justinschuh 14y ago
      You obviously replied to the wrong comment, or simply read nothing that I wrote.

s_henry_paulson 14y ago

It's not so much that users want/need the features you describe, but it's the lack of something... anything ... spectacularly new that is what is opening the door for the competition. I've had more iPhones than I can count dating back to the first launch, and I'm sure I'm not the only one that's going to be checking out the Luminas soon.. not because I don't like the iPhone, but rather looking at change just for the sake of doing something different. (to coin a phrase)

marknutter 14y ago
> but rather looking at change just for the sake of doing something different I think this is a geek thing. Non-techies aren't always looking for the latest and greatest beyond the next whole number attached to their brand of choice.

simplexion 14y ago

I am tired of hearing this myth that the first iPhone was so revolutionary. That is completely ignoring that the LG Prada was released prior to it. The iPhone didn't do anything new. You could buy a Nokia phone at the time that did all the iPhone did and some. The iPhone couldn't copy and paste, MMS and a bunch of other basic things that other phones at the time could.

marknutter 14y ago
Well, without getting into an argument about what exactly made the iPhone revolutionary in terms of features and design, I think the evidence is clear: average people didn't buy smartphones before the iPhone came out, they did after it came out. Now every phone looks like an iPhone. Sounds revolutionary to me, in every sense of the word.
- simplexion 14y ago
  Touchscreen does not make a smartphone. Plenty of people had non-touchscreen smartphones prior to the iPhone.
czr80 14y ago
Indeed, it was nothing new, brought out by a company that knew nothing about phones. No wonder it bombed so badly. Nearly destroyed Apple - they sure won't make that mistake again.
panacea 14y ago
It was the first iPod with mobile Safari that worked really well as a browser (it also made phonecalls). It was fucking revolutionary and the numbers speak for themselves.
_djo_ 14y ago
Anybody saying the LG Prada is proof that the iPhone was not revolutionary has clearly never used an LG Prada. It was not a good phone. The mere fact that nearly every smartphone on the market today has the same form factor as the iPhone and follows a similar UI paradigm should be evidence enough of the iPhone's impact. I see no reason to deny that.

cbr 14y ago

> there's really just not much more a smartphone can, or really should do Really? What about: * haptic feedback as a 2d surface? http://senseg.com/ http://senseg.com/ * replacing all the cards you carry in your wallet (NFC) * going a week on a charge * predictive modeling where your phone preloads webpages/directions/music that it thinks you're going to need I suspect your comment will seem obviously wrong in five years.

marknutter 14y ago
haptic feedback? I only ever hear geeks asking for that feature, and it's YEARS off. NFC will only be as useful as the number of vendors who adopt it. Yes, increasing battery life significantly will always be a killer feature, but that's obvious. Predictive modeling sounds like software to me, and I'm talking about hardware features.
onetimeuse001 14y ago
"I suspect your comment will seem obviously wrong in five years." I suspect your comment too will seem obviously wrong in sixty-five years. Geez

bryanlarsen 14y ago

For myself, Android phones have 2 major features that I would sorely miss if I switched to iPhone 5: - a 4.7 inch screen is almost 50% larger than a 4.0 inch screen - transit integration with maps As far as I can tell, the only thing that I would gain by switching to an iPhone would be a CBC music app that doesn't suck. But your basic point is correct: we've reached the point of diminishing returns. Any high end iPhone or Android phone is "good enough" and the differences between them are not worth the time or effort that most people put into them. Here's my buying advice for smartphones. If you already have one and want to upgrade, buy one of the same kind. The pain of switching ecosystems is far greater than any benefit you'll get from switching. If you don't already have a smartphone, buy one similar to what your friends use. The benefit you get from a shared ecosystem far outweighs any difference between phones.

marknutter 14y ago
That's solid advice. As for transit info, that did exist until Apple ditched Google Maps, but Google will release a dedicated app for Maps and all will be right with the world again.
- gonzo 14y ago
  Google's app could also be a supplier of transit info for the built-in (Apple) Maps application.
ebrenes 14y ago
I'm the opposite, I've been yearning for an even thinner phone. And now that the new one has a unibody aluminum case I won't feel so compelled to fit a rubber bumper around it. Also my current phone, the iphone 4s, feels a bit short, so I could see the increased length working better when talking on it. Just for those form factor features alone I'd gladly switch to the iPhone 5.

dagw 14y ago

I hear people lamenting things like the fact that they won't be able to wirelessly charge the iPhone 5 I suspect Apple is holding off on wireless charging until they can get all their ducks in a line as it where. Placing your phone on a brick isn't a huge win compared to pugging your phone in. Placing your iPhone, Macbook, iPad and any other battery powered Apple device anywhere on your desk (or at least a large part of your desk) and having them automatically charge would be a pretty huge win.

isleyaardvark 14y ago
Apple is holding off on wireless charging until wireless charging is more common. Phil Schiller has said as much. You still have to plug in the charger itself. Whereas with USB you can plug it directly into laptops and it's also offered in many other devices (monitors, car stereos, airplanes). And this avoids trying to engineer two different charging methods. Apple would still have to offer USB charging, they're not going to force all iPhone users to buy a wireless charging station, not yet.