[DECS]

roughlydrafted.com : the Secret iPhone Details Lost in a Sea of Hype and Hate

"Apple has dropped just enough information at just regular enough intervals to create a level of anticipation for the iPhone that can only be described as off the hook. Amid all the opinions--and the frantic warnings of doom from certain analyst groups--are a few details that have been largely overlooked."

Takes on the media and Gartner's IT fear mongering.

[Wiskedjak]

Reads like someone trying to defend his/her faith.

Honestly, I like Apple products, but I have no devotion to them and have no illusions about their faults (especially with this release of 10.4.10). But, I also like alot of Apple's competitors. I have no problems with Microsoft. This article reads as someone who is blindly devoted to Apple (the AirPort was not a "runaway hit" to anyone but those who didn't realize that non-Apple/vastly cheaper wifi routers would work with their Apple computer). The author is a hater of those he/she perceives as haters.

The iPhone may well be a smashing success, but there are a few things working against it. Also, I've yet to hear and be convinced on how it will revolutionize communication. So far, the claims that the iPhone will be a revolution ring with the same hollowness of Kamen's claim about the Segway revolutionizing transportation. The only thing that is really cool to me about the iPhone is the interface, and while very nice, it's hardly revolutionary.

[DigitalEl]

Funny how different people can get different things out of the same article. I thought the Roughly Drafted article was a well thought out and reasoned response to the irrational and emotional criticism that's been slung at a device which hasn't yet hit the market.

I thought the article also laid out a plausible explanation for why some of the big name IT pundits have done nothing but hate on the iPhone since its announcement.

Is the guy clearly an Apple fan? Sure. But at least you know where he's coming from at the start. That's much preferable to the supposedly balanced tech "news" sites which spew misinformation and flat-out lies under the guise of journalism. CNET, ZD Net, Gizmodo... I'm lookin' at you.

Lastly, other articles on the site present sane rebuttals to the most common criticisms the iPhone has faced. Especially true, IMHO, is how misguided all the "but it doesn't have 3G/GPS/a removable battery/a 5 MP camera/etc." arguments are. The author points out the fact the iPhone is not being marketed to the kind of spec-hungry nerds which frequent teh Internets forums, but to a wide general audience that doesn't so much care.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by DigitalEl 

The author points out the fact the iPhone is not being marketed to the kind of spec-hungry nerds which frequent teh Internets forums, but to a wide general audience that doesn't so much care.

If that's the case, then I think the iPhone pricing structure is a little off. Personally, I don't think the "wide general audience" is willing to pay what Apple is asking for plus the cost of a data plan. From my observations of cell phone use, "spec-hungry nerds which frequent teh Internets forums" and business users are the vast majority of people I see with expensive phones and phones that use data plans.

I may be wrong, of course, but I'll be impressed with Apple's market research if the "wide general audience" buys into the iPhone. It wasn't until the 3rd iPod generation that the "wide general audience" bought into it.

[analogika]

That same "wide general audience", however was willing to pay the price of the iPod for having a device they could and would USE.

Apple is betting they'll pay another $100-200 for a phone that they can actually USE, as well.

[DigitalEl]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

From my observations of cell phone use, "spec-hungry nerds which frequent teh Internets forums" and business users are the vast majority of people I see with expensive phones and phones that use data plans.

I may be wrong, of course, but I'll be impressed with Apple's market research if the "wide general audience" buys into the iPhone. It wasn't until the 3rd iPod generation that the "wide general audience" bought into it.

Indeed, we will see. For what it's worth, wide general audiences have bought into all sorts of premium products. BMW sells tons of 3 Series, when an Accord would get you from Point A to Point B just as easily. Sure, the iPhone is expensive, but so what!?

I don't buy that a company as successful as Apple has been for the past few years would simply throw a product onto the market without having done their marketing homework. None of the nay-sayers have ready access to the numbers Apple used when green-lighting the project, so how can they say what will or won't work in the marketplace?

Maybe "business users are the vast majority of people" you see "with expensive phones and phones that use data plans" because of the circles in which YOU travel. Do you really believe you have your finger on the pulse of the market because of your casual observations?

I know that I don't have my finger on the pulse of any markets. I'm a well-read layman, but that doesn't mean I'm qualified to opine on whether some company's product will sell. That's their business. People smarter than me go to work every day in shiny buildings to figure that stuff out. Who am I to second-guess their work? I just wish all the other self-styled pundits and armchair experts would admit the same.

As for comparing the upcoming iPhone's sales numbers to that of the iPod, keep it in perspective. (At least publicly) Apple is aiming for 1% of the mobile market. Still, I'm guessing, haters will cry "I told you so" if the device doesn't approach the insane market share the iPod still enjoys.

[icruise]

One of the reasons the iPhone is important is that it may change the cell phone market. Now, just about everyone gets their phones for free when they sign up for a cell phone service, which obviously puts a ceiling on the amount of technology that can go into those phones. The smartphones are mostly limited to business types. If regular people show that they are willing to spend money for something good, it could lead to better phones across the board. In fact, you could argue that this (assuming it actually happens) is the actual "revolutionary" aspect of the iPhone.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by analogika 

That same "wide general audience", however was willing to pay the price of the iPod for having a device they could and would USE.

Eventually, but not in the first 2 generations of the product. It wasn't until gen 3, as prices began to drop and the Mini was introduced, that you began to see white headphones everywhere.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by icruise 

In fact, you could argue that this (assuming it actually happens) is the actual "revolutionary" aspect of the iPhone.

I'll agree with that, if it "revolutionizes" the perceived value of the cellphone. On a similar vein, it is also "revolutionary" that Apple was able to introduce a feature rich cellphone without those features being locked down by the service provider. I wonder if that will still work with phones less anticipated than the iPhone?

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by DigitalEl 

I don't buy that a company as successful as Apple has been for the past few years would simply throw a product onto the market without having done their marketing homework.

Except, of course, Apple has misread their market research in the past (Cube, Newton)

Originally Posted by DigitalEl 

Maybe "business users are the vast majority of people" you see "with expensive phones and phones that use data plans" because of the circles in which YOU travel. Do you really believe you have your finger on the pulse of the market because of your casual observations?

Yes, I do. Having worked as a user researcher for commercial technology companies for several years, it is my job to observe people and their market preferences. I bring people in for interviews and observe them in public places. I pay particular attention to the technology people carry around. That's not to say that my observations are 100%, and I wouldn't be surprised if Apple were right and I was wrong (if anyone could be 100%, there would never be failed products), but it's suffice to say that I do understand the market.

[Stogieman]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Eventually, but not in the first 2 generations of the product. It wasn't until gen 3, as prices began to drop and the Mini was introduced, that you began to see white headphones everywhere.

I don't think price was the only factor in keeping the "general audience" from purchasing generation 1 & 2 ipods. The 3rd gen iPod took off because it supported Windows and USB 2.0. iPod sales hit the stratosphere once iTunes was released for Windows.

[icruise]

Yes, that's largely correct. I had a lot of people ask me about the iPod when it was still Mac-only, so there was a fair amount of pent-up demand. Don't forget also that there was no Windows version of iTunes even after the first Windows-compatible iPods came out (they shipped with the craptastic Music Match Jukebox). With iTunes and later the iTunes Store, the iPod really started to take off.

[DigitalEl]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

Yes, I do. Having worked as a user researcher for commercial technology companies for several years, it is my job to observe people and their market preferences. I bring people in for interviews and observe them in public places. I pay particular attention to the technology people carry around. That's not to say that my observations are 100%, and I wouldn't be surprised if Apple were right and I was wrong (if anyone could be 100%, there would never be failed products), but it's suffice to say that I do understand the market.

Fair enough. I respect that you're tuned into the market. Still, unless you're seeing Apple's research, your observations aren't necessarily pertinent to the iPhone. I, too, was in marketing, but the demographic and psychographic info I was privy to in one industry didn't necessarily translate to any others.

Good points, reference the Cube and Newton, too. I could see Apple being led astray by Steve's ego. For instance, when some reporter asked whether there was any internal debate about the iPhone's soft keyboard, Steve said there was not. From the tone of that interview, one is led to believe there was no debate because Steve had his mind made up.

That kind of leadership is what makes Apple great. After all, the worst industry has to offer is the product of focus groups and design-by-committee outfits. However, that giant ego can misstep, too.

In a couple of weeks we'll have a much better idea of how this will all shake out.

[icruise]

Originally Posted by DigitalEl 

Good points, reference the Cube and Newton, too. I could see Apple being led astray by Steve's ego.

You probably know this, but just for the record, the Newton had nothing to do with Steve Jobs, and in fact he apparently hated it.

[DigitalEl]

Originally Posted by icruise

You probably know this, but just for the record, the Newton had nothing to do with Steve Jobs, and in fact he apparently hated it.

You're right, of course. I was referring to the Cube and to certain design decisions on the iPhone.