Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Wiskedjak · Dec 18, 2006, 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by KeyLimePi

so then...what will Apple's phone be called?

From all accounts, it's as much an iPod as a phone...so maybe just iPod Phone?

You're assuming that there will actually be an Apple phone. Personally I gave up on that rumor a long time ago.

Dark Helmet · Dec 18, 2006, 12:02 PM

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

You're assuming that there will actually be an Apple phone. Personally I gave up on that rumor a long time ago.

I think Apple knows that eventually the iPod has to turn into one. Right now the hottest phones on the market are the music playing ones by Sony and Motorola. Apple is letting them corner the market so they better get crackin'.

Gossamer · Dec 18, 2006, 12:38 PM

iPhone anyone?

CheesePuff · Dec 18, 2006, 12:43 PM

I hardly doubt Apple would introduce it now instead of MacWorld in less than 3 weeks. But I hope that isn't the only large announcement then.

Visnaut · Dec 18, 2006, 12:54 PM

Did anyone actually think it would be called the "iPhone"? I always assumed that was the general nickname everyone used.

It's clear Apple wants to leverage the iPod as a platform. The name has such huge brand recognition, that I couldn't imagine Apple dropping iPod from the product name. Just like they didn't name the nano and shuffle the iNano or iShuffle respectively, I wouldn't expect them to go the route of iPhone.

"iPod phone" or "iPod cell" seems much more plausible, even before we had this cisco product pop up today.

This is all assuming they even have a phone in the works. I will not be surprised or disillusioned if we don't even see one at MWSF.

Though it would be funny if Apple sent out a press invite for an event shortly after Jan 1, and captioned it as "Ring in the New Year". It would totally be in line with their tongue-in-cheek style with the last few invites.

Y3a · Dec 18, 2006, 01:31 PM

Well? Nothing on the web site yet. sound of crickets in the background, and lots of folks smirking about the prediction being wrong.

MaxPower2k3 · Dec 18, 2006, 01:33 PM

Originally Posted by Y3a

Well? Nothing on the web site yet. sound of crickets in the background, and lots of folks smirking about the prediction being wrong.

Perhaps you should read the first page?

The iPhone Lives: But the Trademark Belongs to Cisco - Gizmodo

Wiskedjak · Dec 18, 2006, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by Y3a

Well? Nothing on the web site yet. sound of crickets in the background, and lots of folks smirking about the prediction being wrong.

The prediction was dead on. The iPhone was announced today. Gizmodo did not say it would be Apple announcing the iPhone.

PB2K · Dec 18, 2006, 04:16 PM

If apple ain't using it, someone else will

good one for cisco

::maroma:: · Dec 18, 2006, 04:27 PM

Wow, Gizmodo is lame. What a bunch of losers.

I guess it doesn't matter what Gizmodo says anymore, every word that spews forth from their pages is garbage. (Maybe that's not something new)

Macworld '07 still stands.

Eug · Dec 18, 2006, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

I think AAPL might drop some more if they don't release that phone Monday.

AAPL is taking a hit today. Down 3%.

Originally Posted by ::maroma::

Wow, Gizmodo is lame. What a bunch of losers.

I guess it doesn't matter what Gizmodo says anymore, every word that spews forth from their pages is garbage. (Maybe that's not something new)

Why? Gizmodo was 100% accurate this time around.

Gossamer · Dec 18, 2006, 04:42 PM

Originally Posted by Eug

AAPL is taking a hit today. Down 3%.

Why? Gizmodo was 100% accurate this time around.

They were purposefully misleading. Definition is determined by usage, and every other article out there discussed the iPhone as the Apple iPhone. They knew exactly what they were doing when they said iPhone.

Wiskedjak · Dec 18, 2006, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by Gossamer

They knew exactly what they were doing when they said iPhone.

Of course they knew. They said they knew it was Cisco as far back as Thursday.

If anyone is snickering, it's at Apple for letting Apple fanboys spend years building up recognition for a brand owned by someone else.

Eug · Dec 18, 2006, 04:56 PM

Originally Posted by Gossamer

They were purposefully misleading. Definition is determined by usage, and every other article out there discussed the iPhone as the Apple iPhone. They knew exactly what they were doing when they said iPhone.

Of course they did. And they were 100% right.

"Gizmodo Knows: iPhone Will Be Announced On Monday

I guarantee it. It isn't what I expected at all. And I've already said too much."

Gossamer · Dec 18, 2006, 05:45 PM

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

Of course they knew. They said they knew it was Cisco as far back as Thursday.

If anyone is snickering, it's at Apple for letting Apple fanboys spend years building up recognition for a brand owned by someone else.

What would you propose that Apple do instead? At no point (that I can recall) has Apple ever said 'iPhone.' It's all speculation. Do you expect them to come out and say, "No you losers, it not iPhone, it's iChat Mobile" or whatever? Of course not. It's the Apple fanboys' fault if anything.

Originally Posted by Eug

Of course they did. And they were 100% right.

"Gizmodo Knows: iPhone Will Be Announced On Monday

I guarantee it. It isn't what I expected at all. And I've already said too much."

They were 100% right using the most literal translation. But not if you go by the definition of the word that's dictated by common usage.

Wiskedjak · Dec 18, 2006, 06:33 PM

Originally Posted by Gossamer

What would you propose that Apple do instead? At no point (that I can recall) has Apple ever said 'iPhone.' It's all speculation.

Precisely. The fanboys have been speculating about the iPhone for years, generating brand recognition around the name that has even extended beyond the geek-o-sphere. If Apple had any intention of launching a phone, they should have leaked a little information about a more accurate name so that Cisco's iPhone wouldn't benefit from the Apple speculation machine.

Apple's fault is it's incessant need for shocking product launches. Any rational company would have said something before the speculation got out of control. It wouldn't surprise me if any potential Apple phone product was scrapped simply because it could never live up to the speculation.

::maroma:: · Dec 18, 2006, 07:00 PM

Originally Posted by Eug

Of course they did. And they were 100% right.

"Gizmodo Knows: iPhone Will Be Announced On Monday

I guarantee it. It isn't what I expected at all. And I've already said too much."

Don't try to make this out to be an innocent little joke or some sort of accidental misdirection. It was Gizmodo being shameless and trying to get page hits. Period. It was stupid. I didn't fall for it, since I knew Apple wouldn't introduce anything today, but I still think its a lame stunt.

This is an incident of a company misleading people to garner profit. Its precisely the type of behavior I hate. What if Apple were to pull something this? What if they had a page up and purposefully mislead its readers into thinking it had special info and such, only to get page hits and gain profit from it? Then when the lie was uncovered, they try to blame their readers for being stupid?

Yeah I think that would be a different outcome. There wouldn't be people saying "oh how silly of them!" There would be people saying "god I hate them, I hope they die."

Eug Wanker · Dec 18, 2006, 07:41 PM

Originally Posted by ::maroma::

Don't try to make this out to be an innocent little joke or some sort of accidental misdirection. It was Gizmodo being shameless and trying to get page hits. Period. It was stupid. I didn't fall for it, since I knew Apple wouldn't introduce anything today, but I still think its a lame stunt.

This is an incident of a company misleading people to garner profit. Its precisely the type of behavior I hate. What if Apple were to pull something this? What if they had a page up and purposefully mislead its readers into thinking it had special info and such, only to get page hits and gain profit from it? Then when the lie was uncovered, they try to blame their readers for being stupid?

Yeah I think that would be a different outcome. There wouldn't be people saying "oh how silly of them!" There would be people saying "god I hate them, I hope they die."

Personally I think it's quite amusing.

- - e r i k - - · Dec 18, 2006, 07:46 PM

Originally Posted by Gossamer

What would you propose that Apple do instead? At no point (that I can recall) has Apple ever said 'iPhone.'

iPhone.org

*gasp*

Andy8 · Dec 18, 2006, 07:55 PM

Perhaps it will be called the MacPhone

MaxPower2k3 · Dec 18, 2006, 08:32 PM

Originally Posted by Andy8

Perhaps it will be called the MacPhone

Will I have to spend an extra $200 to get it in black, or an extra $900 to get the MacPhone Pro?

mrtew · Dec 18, 2006, 11:28 PM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

iPhone.org

*gasp*

That's really weird. How can that be explained?

- - e r i k - - · Dec 18, 2006, 11:33 PM

Indeed, enquiring mammals want to know

mrtew · Dec 19, 2006, 12:22 AM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

Indeed, enquiring mammals want to know

What the F are you guys doing? How do you find these? What is Apple doing? You're freaking me out! I feel like it's a weird dream where any generic address takes you to the apple site. Stop that! (More?)

- - e r i k - - · Dec 19, 2006, 12:32 AM

That's what I got on the top of my head. Apple has a bunch of domains, mostly registered around 1999-2000. Mammals.org refers to Darwin and a campaign that was supposedly meant to show of the evolution of Mac OS X.

iPhone is blindingly obvious though

misc · Dec 19, 2006, 01:13 AM

Originally Posted by Gossamer

What would you propose that Apple do instead? At no point (that I can recall) has Apple ever said 'iPhone.' It's all speculation. Do you expect them to come out and say, "No you losers, it not iPhone, it's iChat Mobile" or whatever? Of course not. It's the Apple fanboys' fault if anything.

Actually, I remember an interview many moons ago of Jobs saying there was no plan for an iPhone.

C.A.T.S. CEO · Dec 19, 2006, 01:21 AM

Originally Posted by misc

Actually, I remember an interview many moons ago of Jobs saying there was no plan for an iPhone.

Most people think that he was bluffing

misc · Dec 19, 2006, 01:24 AM

Originally Posted by C.A.T.S. CEO

Most people think that he was bluffing

Well obviously not...

Whatever, let Apple concentrate on computers...

Kevin Dunahee · 04:12 PM

Do you guys think the old Newton card will be played in naming the phone? Don't forget where Newton.com leads.

Gossamer · Dec 19, 2006, 10:19 AM

Originally Posted by Kevin Dunahee

Do you guys think the old Newton card will be played in naming the hone? Don't forget where Newton.com leads.

Don't tell me, I'm gonna check....

NO

ING WAY!

haha.

legacyb4 · Dec 19, 2006, 10:36 AM

ha ha, that's funny!

wonder if apple will be forced to give up iphone.org once they release their own product as Cisco could claim something or another in trademark court...

Originally Posted by Gossamer

Don't tell me, I'm gonna check....

NO

ING WAY!

haha.

Gossamer · Dec 19, 2006, 10:48 AM

Originally Posted by legacyb4

ha ha, that's funny!

wonder if apple will be forced to give up iphone.org once they release their own product as Cisco could claim something or another in trademark court...

Who do you think they are...Apple?