Seems like a nice telephone, but $500 and Cingular-only is disappointing. The demo also looked cool, except the phone's software seems really slow. I hope they get that figured out before these things go to market.

Cingular may not be allowed to discount the phone, but it can still offer other incentives (service discounts) to lower the total cost of signing up with them.

Cingular apparently has a "multi-year exclusive agreement" and Apple and Cingular were quoted as saying that not only would they not unlock these phones, but they had thought of "what our next steps would be" if someone had the audacity to try to unlock their own phone. :td:

On the NYT blog they were quoted as saying that other models would be released "soon" which, to me, indicates that Apple is planning to use the iPod marketing technique on the phone too - release a new model every few months to get fanboys to keep buying over and over again at full price.

I thought that cell phone companies locking mobile phones was now illegal in the US?

No, I remember the thread you're talking about, but I think that was a misinterpretation.

The US Copyright Office granted a DMCA exemption for cell phone firmware that ties a phone to a specific network. That doesn't mean phone companies can't lock them. It does mean that you're allowed to unlock a phone, provided you're able to figure out how to do it. The phone company is not required to unlock it for you.

Cisco has filed a trademark infringement suit against Apple. Looks like Cisco has owned the iPhone name since 2000; the name was patented in 1999. Apple has been trying to buy or license it since 2001, but Cisco has use of the name so they've kept it.

Apple did an end-run around the law, filing trademark applications in Trinidad and Tobago and then in Australia. Cisco charges "willful and malicious violation of Cisco’s trademark rights, aimed at preventing Cisco from continuing to build a business around a markthat it has long possessed".

http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=4267&tag=nl.e589

Apple pulled a fast one on Apple Music on that trademark, but I have a feeling they'll get their clock cleaned on this one.

I like this clause- it won't happen, but it sounds good:

The issue (according to some in the know at Cisco) is that Apple does not want to pay to play (literally and figuratively) for the Iphone moniker. And they will lose this one to Cisco and lose large--the original trademark dates to about 1996. They've (Cisco) been shipping stuff with "IPhone" on the plastic and in the materials for a year now.

I hope the slick marketing people at Apple can come up with something besides "phone" to tack behind the "i" on this.

Apple may get it elsewhere. But not in the US.

What about the iHorn? Remember when people used to call phones "the horn"?

It will be interesting to see what copycat phones emerge.
Now that a phone is in production, it's ony a matter of time until other models are revealed by the successful Chinese contractors.

If I had one of these I'd surely lose it. :)

Cisco's GC says it's about interoperability, not money. Maybe they want Apple to bundle it with their VPN client, or with their VOIP softphone?

Apple has had three different models of iPods (now four, including the iPhone). The company revs each about once every six months. They don't always rev at the same time, so this makes it seem like iPods are changing more often than they really do.

Coming out with a new iPod Video once every 6-8 months really isn't too terribly often when you think about it. Same with the Nano, same with the Shuffle. In fact, the Shuffle has actually revved less often than every 6-8 months. It's only revved once in its 2+ year history. But if Apple introduces new iPod Videos in, say, March and October, and Nanos rev in, say, January and June, and Shuffles rev each September, then you end up with new iPods out every 3 months -- but they're totally different models. My point is this notion of all iPods becomming obsolete before you can turn around is totally a perception thing.

In the case of the iPhone, the models announced this week haven't even been released and won't be until June. There are only three units in existance in the world right now, according to the Nightline report last night: one on Steve Jobs' person, and two in display cases at MacWorld. So the idea of new versions being released "soon" is goofy. The reason these were announced so far in advance of the actual release is that FCC applications have to be filed, and that would make the information on the product public. I think we can expect the standard six-eight month lifecycle that nearly every Apple product has. That would put the next rev sometime around the next MacWorld. How convenient.

I've followed these trends since I started at Apple 7 years ago, not long after Steve rejoined the company (which essentially represents when the Apple was born again... any paradigm of Apple Before Steve's second coming progressively became null after he arrived). The patterns for product revs and new product announcements has become pretty straightforward. You never know what the nature of the rev will be, but it's not difficult to predict when you will see it: CPUs and iPods: every 6-9 months. Software: once a year. OS: every 1.5-2 years. Displays, wireless (Airport) devices, and other small accessories are less predictable and don't change often. That's the deal.

Maybe eventually the individuals in the media will stick around/pay attention long enough to also see these patterns. I doubt it though. Reminds me: for the first 3 years of the iPod's life, Rex Crum from CBS MarketWatch called the iPod the IPod (capital I) in his articles, even after repeated emails from readers. It was only in the last couple of years that he was able to type the name of the product correctly. Point being: the media, who is feeding a lot of the perception and opinions to most people, can't even pay enough attention to detail to correctly type in the name of the product on which they're reporting. makes you wonder.

When can I buy? Will it come unlocked?

That's interesting. It's about the money, though. Cisco is not exactly going to win friends with claims or history of "interoperability." I give you SCCP, HSRP, EIGRP, VTP, and ISL (off the top of my head--and that's before I get to their early VPN clients). I think (and have heard from people in the know at Cisco) that they were more than a little bit miffed about Apple figuring they'd throw the product launch, register iPhone as a trademark in someplace like Trinidad, and generally "get to Cisco in due time." The boys and girls on Tazman Drive don't take well to that sort of thing, much less from Apple (who generally pimp-slaps anyone who gets within 100 feet of any of it's trademarks).

I saw the iPhone in action at Macworld and it seems to run really smooth and fast for all the feature. The internet portion loaded kind of slow on it, but its alot faster than a smaller page trying to load on my new PDA with WiFi. I really like the multi touch feature which allow you to more than one fingers on the phone (so you can zoom in and out of a picture was what they did to show off the multi touch feature). Also you can type pretty fast on it for a touch screen. Apple has full control over the distribution of these phones and the way the agreements were made, it seems like you can only buy the phone from Cingular or Apple directly for the first few months. I also read that Apple had more say in what the first generation iPhone can and can not have such as it can not have a 3G network but during the keynote Steve Jobs indicated that there may be a future version with 3G. Now is it worth $499 for a 4GB and $599 for a 8GB? Knowing that Steve Jobs hinted at his own keynote at Macworld that there will be a 3G version of the iPhone, I would wait for that. But since I get employee discount on all Apple products and Cingular services through a EPP program at my work, I'm gonna buy it anyways when it hit the market in June. Than if Apple does come out with a 3G version, I guess I'll get that one too. (They say the phone will hit the market in June at Macworld.)

ummm....
iCom / iCommunicate
iTalk
iChat: The Phone
iPod X (for OS X)
iCingular (doubt it since the agreement with Apple is no Cingular logo anywhere on the iPhone except in electronic form ie background picture)
iCell
iReally need to think of something new cause "i" infront of everything is really getting old.

That's really presumptuous of you to think that everyone has the same needs or wants as you do from a device. Also to think that everyone has the same financial constrains and is bad with managing credit.