Originally Posted by
typical
There are plenty of excuses:
OS X's power handling isn't good enough to justify the extra drain of 3G
That isn't an excuse, that just means they were lazy. Apple has spent years perfecting power management to the point where their MP3 players have some of the best battery life on the market.
Sealing in the battery means they couldn't get away with how quickly the battery would die with 3G
See my remark re. design over functionality. If they did their market research they would know that anno 2007 people will demand 3G. If I am not mistaken this has to be the worlds first GSM phone with a non removable battery.
The cost of the licence agreements would kill the price point of the device (WCDMA is patented to the hilt; the major manufacturers get round this by 'swapping' permissions but what does Apple bring to the party?)
Kill the price point? It's selling for more than any phone ever has at the moment. I've yet to find any source for your licensing remarks, surely all they have to do is purchase a chipset from Qualcomm and be done with it? They don't have to deal with patents. HTC uses a Qualcomm chipset and they don't bring anything to the party.
The extra bulk of 3G means the product wouldn't look quite so sexy
There is no extra bulk. See the Samsung Blackjack or Z150. The difference in chipset size is negligible.
Apple couldn't solve the technical issues of using 3G in time
No real technical issues, these chipsets are pretty turnkey, just like the Infineon chipset they are using now you put it in and can access its functions right away. It isn't like Apple designed an entire radio and controller from the ground up.
Apple don't believe 3G will add anything to their sales (I still maintain their sales figures are stupifyingly unrealistic)...
That one is possible, and if true then its pretty stupid. It will possibly be the nr.1 reason this phone doesn't sell as well as Stevo thinks.