Apple Announces New iPods, Cue Fanboy Frenzy, Navel-Gazing

from the ihype dept

Apple refreshed its iPod line today, announcing the long-expected touchscreen iPod among other things. The event was pretty wide-ranging, with a lot to chew on. The biggest early news was the announcement that iPhone owners will be able to create ringtones from songs they've purchased from the iTunes Music Store... for an additional 99 cents on top of the cost of the downloaded track. Perhaps this is an attempt by Apple to throw a bone to disgruntled record companies, but it's likely to call attention to legions of mobile handsets other than the iPhone that will let user set MP3s and other types of audio files as ringtones for free. Apple also sliced the price of the 8GB iPhone by $200, to $399 -- indicating that demand has slowed as demand among diehard Mac fans and other early adopters has been filled. The price cut is probably also a reaction to the iPod Touch, which appears to be an iPhone without any phone, and a similar 8GB model of it has been priced at $299. This may prove to be an attractive alternative to the iPhone for many users, since it has a fairly similar feature set, outside cellular connectivity, including WiFi web browsing -- but comes at a lower upfront cost, plus without the need for a long-term contract with AT&T.

Perhaps the most curious announcement, though, was news of an Apple partnership with Starbucks. iPhone and iPod Touch users will eventually see an extra icon on their screen when they're within range of a WiFi-enabled Starbucks. The application it leads to will allow them to see what songs are playing in the store, and buy them from the iTMS, and they can also access the iTMS without having to pay usage fees for the hotspot. On the face of it, it's a pretty underwhelming offering, just like all of Starbucks' previous attempts at digital music downloads, and the fact that Steve Jobs claimed Apple had been working on it for two years is hardly reassuring. Despite Jobs' contention that the service is "very cool", it's hard to see it selling more iPods, or making much money on its own.

Filed Under: iphone, ipod, itunes
Companies: apple, at&t, starbucks, t-mobile

iPhone Supposedly Gets Unlocked, AT&T Apparently Freaks Out

from the on-what-grounds dept

There were several reports last week that the operator lock on the iPhone had been broken, meaning that people might be able to use the device with service from a company other than AT&T. The first to emerge was from a New Jersey teenager, who came up with a complex method involving soldering and software; then two separate companies later said they had software-only unlocking methods. To be sure, these unlocking methods and services will only ever appeal to a small number of users, as most general consumers won't really care, or won't want to go to the trouble. With that in mind, it really doesn't seem like AT&T has much at stake financially, but that apparently hasn't stopped its lawyers from threatening one of the software providers. The company claims it got a call from a law firm representing the company, tossing around things like copyright infringement and "illegal software dissemination" in what appears to be an attempt at intimidating the company to keep them from releasing the software (particularly since the DMCA doesn't cover phone unlocking). It's worth reiterating that these are supposedly AT&T's lawyers, not Apple's -- but it's not clear what standing AT&T would have to sue, making this look like little more than a SLAPP situation. Apple's remained quiet on the matter, but it wouldn't be surprising to see the company close the loophole or re-lock the phones with one of its software updates, since it has a financial stake in iPhone buyers activating and using their phones on AT&T thanks to its revenue-sharing deal with the operator. Of course, it could take the more enlightened view that it doesn't want to frustrate and annoy the customers who would go to the trouble of unlocking their iPhones -- but if it were going to do that, it wouldn't have locked the device to AT&T in the first place.

Filed Under: iphone, slapp, unlocking, wireless
Companies: apple, at&t

The Underground iPhone Users Of Vermont Trying To Hide From AT&T

from the how-dare-these-people-want-to-give-us-money dept

It's no secret that Apple's new iPhone is quite popular across the nation, with competitors everywhere trying to figure out how to respond. There certainly have been some complaints about some of the limitations imposed by the iPhone, but people everywhere are trying to find workarounds. Tech.Blorge alerts us to the fact that a bunch of iPhone users in Vermont have had to go virtually underground to get and use iPhones. The problem, apparently, is that since AT&T has an exclusive deal to offer the iPhone, they don't want people using it primarily on roaming networks. Right now, you cannot get AT&T wireless service in Vermont -- and AT&T's contract threatens to cut off anyone who buys or uses an iPhone there. Of course, that's not going to stop some people, who are ordering iPhones from elsewhere and even setting up P.O. Boxes out of state where the 300 page iPhone bills can be sent. They know that they're risking being cut off but they just can't help it. For their part, AT&T insists that they will cut off anyone they find who lives in an area not served by AT&T wireless (which is actually a fairly large area), or anyone who uses more than 40% of their iPhone time on roaming networks. This, of course, is a bit ridiculous. These people want to pay money. They're happy customers or both Apple and AT&T -- and the company wants to cut them off. If expense is the problem, they should just charge them more for roaming, but cutting them off completely in the name of an exclusivity contract doesn't make any sense. It makes the iPhone and wireless service from AT&T less valuable, which is exactly the opposite of what the exclusivity clause was supposed to do.

Filed Under: iphone, roaming, vermont
Companies: apple

Apple Sued For Patent Infringement On iPhone Keyboard

from the and-out-come-the-wolves dept

It's almost surprising that it took this long, but someone has finally sued Apple for patent infringement related to the iPhone. Remember, back when Steve Jobs announced the iPhone he hyped up all the patents the company filed associated with the phone. It didn't make sense to us, because many of the technologies in the iPhone weren't new at all and had plenty of prior art. It was just the ability to put them all together in a compelling package that people would buy that was the key -- and no one could simply mimic Apple's ability to do that (though we can all watch others flounder around as they try). Still, with any new technologies these days, there's bound to be a patent thicket, meaning that there would inevitably be patent disputes. We had discussed a potential patent suit over the touchscreen interface, but it's not clear what became of that. In this latest case, the patent is for putting a keyboard on a touchscreen, which hardly seems like such a unique idea that it deserves a patent. Oddly, if you read the actual patent, it notes that "the input area... may not be minimized, maximized, or deleted." Since the iPhone keyboard can be minimized, you would think this patent doesn't apply. But, these days, why let little details prevent a patent lawsuit and potentially billions in payouts for doing nothing? Not surprisingly, the company is demanding a cut of every iPhone sold and wants an injunction against selling more iPhones with this technology included. Update: Turns out there's even more to this story. The guy who holds the patent was recently sentenced to 51 months in prison for fraud.

Filed Under: iphone, patents
Companies: apple

If You Can't Even Describe The Past, How Can You Predict The Future?

from the iPhorecast dept

When Apple reported its opening weekend iPhone sales, Wall Street was disappointed that the 270,000 figure it gave out failed to hit much loftier estimates. Of course, this raises the old question: did Apple miss estimates or did analysts mis-estimate? In a sense, the answer is always both, although its worth exploring why the numbers were so far apart. Looking into this question, Carl Bialik notes that Wall Street analysts basically got caught up in emotional hype, as each one tried to outdo each other by making bolder predictions. Their mistakes were exacerbated by the use of small sample sizes, which they mistakenly extrapolated across the country. Analysts make predictions about unit sales all the time for all kinds of products, but you have to wonder how they can accurately predict the future when they can't even correctly gauge what's already happened.

Filed Under: iphone, wall street
Companies: apple