CrunchGear

Seth - you make great points here. And you’re probably also totally accurate in your assessment. But the greater question that has to be asked here is, colloquially, “Yeah? So??”

Apple makes ALL of their money introducing new products on specific timetables and, mysteriously, “disappearing” the previous generation models the very day the new gen device is released. Planned obsolescence is a business model, and Apple has perfected it. People are STILL going to be climbing over each other for MONTHS — probably close to a year — to get a first-generation iPhone, and then *poof*, a new product will be on the shelves with new features.

And then people will want that one. They will forget about gen 1 and lust after gen 2 — and this includes owners of the gen 1 iPhone. Step 3, Profit++.

So you and I can talk till the cows come home about how annoying planned obsolescence is, but at the end of the day, iPhones are still going to be sold out for months after the release, and Apple will make gobs of cash. And the release of Gen 2 will be JUST as hyped as Gen 1’s. And everyone will still love apple.

“but paying $600 … for this thing now is foolish.”

I agree with the above remark but I also think this statement is not relevant to the discussion and is just an arbitrary opinion. I fully plan on buying one to replace my aging blackberry from a company I no longer work for. 600 bucks is fine with me as it is with a number of people. I also bought a new MacBookPro three months ago with the full knowledge that Apple will sooner or later release updates (and they did a couple of weeks ago). Its all about need, requirements, and can you afford it. If people wait for to purchase something because it will be outdated in a month - not only is that completely stupid - but its been the reality of this industry for as long as I can remember.

(also - is it me or these iPhone articles getting more and more bitter?)

Ah Yoshi, the mystery and fog of geekdom surrounding the iPhone is slowly lifting, and although a lot of people are excited, I think quite a few are also disappointed.

When it comes to cellphones and what not, all manufacturers (save maybe Motorola, which tanked because it didn’t) have to follow the same business model of planned obsolescence and rapid production.

Cell phones are designed to recoup all their fixed and variable costs within the first 3 months of production (if not shorter, I heard Motorola is upping the ante in trying to re-jump start their company with a 60 day plan). After the first 3 months, any further phone development/production/support is slashed, and everything redirected to the next phone waiting to be released.

The same is with the iPhone, but more so I’d think. You want to release it ASAP to get the name and recognition out there, and then you take the next year to reform and refine it to something you’re happy with. The Motorola Razr is a prime example of these phone tactics coming to play. They released the phone, had surging sales for maybe a month. Then, they took the following year to release 3 more versions of the phone, each with more than the previous. I dunno if anyone remembers, the first Razr was terrible. Like terrible terrible. Horribly terrible. They had old and outdated hardware, bad UI, lackluster features, etc. But people bought it because it was new and it was small. The newest Razr (V3c or whatever) has a boatload more features.

So yeah the iPhone is gonna suck. But the first iPod wasn’t that special either, it just looked a lot nicer than the others. I’m hoping Apple doesn’t get too complacent,

There’s another reason GPS was likely left out: the GPS chip would eat battery. iPods took a beating for their battery life, so Apple is particularly sensitive to this issue.

Enterprise E-Mail support? Do you really think Apple is going after RIM? They may in time, but not with this phone are they gonig to do it. I can tell you there would need to be a HUGE change before corporations put Apple Iphone Email servers in their enterprise. I don’t think that is where this device is going anyway. Its a CES device not a business device.

I’m tired of hearing people complain about 3G (not rolled out in t he US until 2009 sometime) and the 2 year contract. Most all carriers make you commit to a 2 year contract these days so why should this be any different. In addtion, the phone will be locked down six ways till Sunday so do you really want to spend 600.00 on a phone and leave AT&T six months later? The cell phone business has kind of peaked out, just about every human being has one.. so the way to grow business is to steal customes for other providers. This is EXACTLY what will happen.

As far as the price goes. I happily paid 450.00 for my IPOD and have spent way more then 150.00 for cell phones so past so I don’t think they are too far off the mark with the price.

I think people need to wait for the phone to come out before bashing it. Will the world stop on 6/29…. not hardly but this product may change the way we use phones / access the internet / and listen to and watch content.

You missed the the boat, the true missing feature that is standard on every other smart phone, is memory expansion. This is lack totally criminal and is what will really drive obsolescence. Apple hopes to repeat it’s reduce price and double the memory every year strategy of the iPod to pretty force upgrading. The other bits will just slowly trickle in if they need to bump around the core biz model. Why did they do this, no reason other then they wanted to have two fix price point where they could milk their existing parts stock :p. Oh and try for those forced upgrades if you don’t like syncing play lists and managing every kilobyte manualy.

-Seth

All good points, and solid evaluations of your facts, but I do have one correction to make to your complaint of lack of GPS.

Due to the e911 mandate of the FCC, all mobile devices sold in the United States need to have locational technology built in and enabled for use. According to the current state of the mandate’s policy, that locational information, at minimum, only ‘grabs’ the location and retransmits it up when a caller dials 911. Some do this by GPS, others, by tower triangulation.

In a nutshell, the iPhone doesn’t need GPS - it has something equivalent. The advantages of GPS only assert themselves if the user is outside of tower coverage. While one could still use the turn-by-turn, which is of course, useful, you couldn’t make a call anyway…

I agree with most of what Seth and Jon wrote, so…

Regarding the “who cares?” message from Andy: the shortcomings Seth describes, and their being a result of planned obsolescence, matters because Apple is marketing the iPhone in a manner opposite of its reality. What Andy is accurately describing as a limited, foot-in-the-door product, is being billed as a revolutionary device - what Apple fans are calling “five years ahead of anything out there.” As Andy’s IM example makes clear, in many ways the iPhone is five years *behind* the other phones out in the market. Apple’s dishonesty - even if it’s no worse than what you’d expect from any other company making exaggerated claims and overhyping a product - deserves to be pointed out. This site regularly includes news, analysis, opinion, and advice - to suggest with well-written reason to CG readers that 6/29 is not quite as special as Apple would have you think it is, well, that’s the sort of thing Andy is here for.

Consider this description:
Big-brand tech company makes first effort to enter a consumer market with lots of competition. This company’s presence in the market at all is big news. Key partnerships are made. The new device has a bigger screen than most rival products, a well-reviewed UI, and some hardware features that don’t exist almost anywhere else in the market. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem like this device really takes full advantage of that hardware, and worse, the new hardware is a potential battery-hog. There’s reason to believe this 1.0 is targeted mostly at fanboys of the company. Market-share targets for success are in the single-digits. Most neutral observers don’t feel the device offers much advantage over the market leader - certainly there’s potential there, but its not realized yet. Plus, it’s a closed system, making it hard to use the device and its content as part of an ecosystem. Finally, some pretty important features that you’d think would be easy to include are noticeably absent.

So what did I just describe? The iPhone? Or the Zune?

I’ll admit it’s not a perfect comparison, but I think any honest reader can see the parallels I’m making. If the iPhone was 3G, had a full SDK, included GPS, supported native IM, and had enterprise email support, don’t you think CG would be all about it? If the Zune allowed over-the-air synching and purchasing of songs, ditched the 3/3 sharing limits for zunepass subscribers, supported podcasts and OGG, and had 60/80GB versions that were no bigger/heavier, don’t you think it’d be more than just the anything-but-iPod” choice? These are both 1.0 releases, aimed at eager, early adopters - fans, not price-sensitive consumers. Though a larger vision is there in the background, this instance of each device sacrifices features for stability, time-to-market, and longer battery life. The Zune team has admitted as much (the interview with Paul Thurrott, explaining that podcasts and so much more didn’t make the final cut in favor of solid, sooner-than-later delivery of what was included). Apple can’t admit as much yet, because they haven’t released yet. And maybe they never will, because that’s not their style. It’s true nonetheless.

You’re welcome to disagree. But Andy is perfectly right to point out these flaws. That’s why I read CG, after all.

@ Cosmic :

You’re dead-on. Though at the heart of my comment I meant more that “Apple Knows.” rather than “Who Cares?,” I completely agree with you. This isn’t the first parallel drawn between the iPhone and the Zune, but I think what changes matters most here is that Apple has LEGIONS of to-the-death fans that will be lining up behind the iPhone for a significant amount of time, whereas the Zune (and Microsoft) was dealing with a much smaller niche of fan type.

As such, the misleading marketing does, indeed, stand to create a number of frustrations from this latter geek set (i.e., the people who understand and use all of the features of the iPhone), the “mainstream’ soccer mom / college student set of peoplre aren’t going to notice the difference of not having 3G or integrated GPS. They may notice the lack of IM, but like in SO many other instances, (I can actually picture the face they’ll make when they do this), they will simply resign themselves to the fact that their iPhone doesn’t IM, rather than not purchase it at all. Even if a few people do decline to purchase for this reason, you can bet your butt there’ll be a next person in line happy to grab up the pretty phone they saw in the commercials.

It’s a status symbol. Universally-appreciable and a helluva cheaper than a Ferrari — and it’s still likely to get you more compliments than the supercar. But that’s more an aside than my main argument here: Planned obsolescence is a very popular business model in this arena and is thus not much to complain about. What some may complain about is that Apple has planned for a little *more* obsolescene a little *sooner,* solely because they have stronger brand equity than the other guys fighting it out in the telecomm retail biz.

You want to install every bell and whistle presently on any “Smart Phone” on the iPhone, but there are good reasons why Apple refuses to do that.

First, every feature your respondents want to add will increase the cost of manufacture and this might price the iPhone out of the market.

Next, I’m unsure that enough people actually want the features that your respondents listed. After all, 90% of mobile phone users do not buy Smart Phones now and could. If these features are needed, Apple will add them.

This is planned obsolescence only if you assume that these features ARE necessary. That may not be so. There must be a reason, beside cost, that is keeping people from buying Smart Phones. It could be that Smart Phones are hard to use. Apple may be enticing the people who now own free “feature phones” into the Smart Phone market. That is, growing the market rather than taking market share away– just like it did with the iPod.

And every feature adds complexity to the product, thus taking the risk of confusing people. Unless Apple can find a way to easily and transparently add a feature it will not.

Apple does not try to be all things to all people. It seems that you are caught up in the Microsoft mentality.

I think you’ve missed one important point regarding the “planned obsolescence” of the iPhone.

Apple has mentioned that they will be doing the accounting for the iPhone over time so that they can release new features for existing iPhones without having to play the accounting games they’ve had to do in the past.

So if your concern about buying the iPhone lives in the realm of software (no iChat, unable to connect to corporate networks), fear not. I would imagine that there will be updates which give new functionality–their accounting department pretty much confirmed it.

Missing hardware (HSDPA, GPS, etc.) though, you’re spot on. I’ll wait around for an iPhone which supports these things. Actually, I’ll wait around until I can develop applications for it…

“What’s frustrating about all this is not merely the lack of basic features, but just how easy it would be for Apple to include most of these things… and would cost Apple essentially nothing to include.”

By “cost essentially nothing”, I assume you are implying that these features can be implemented in osftware. Apple promised two years of updates, and even changed their accounting method accordingly. That’s the opposite of planned obsolescence.

What would make the iPhone obsolete?

1) Its 1GHz Pentium is not powerful enough to run tomorrow’s applications; not enough ram; &c.

2) GSM becomes obsolete tomorrow; new frequencies added making quad band obsolete; &c.

3) The end of DRM puts iTunes out of business. Legislation or market factors demand all music files use the WMA format.

4) Web 3.0 debuts. HTML and Javascript are deprecated as Flash and Java move to the fore.

5) Videophones become the rage. The iPhone’s camera is on the wrong side to be a videophone.

6) IBM introduces a phone with the holographic monocle they advertised years ago.

An iPhone with longer battery life doesn’t make an iPhone with shorter battery life obsolete. A smaller iPhone doesn’t make the larger iPhone obsolete. An iPhone with 80GB storage doesn’t make an iPhone with 8GB obsolete. Obsolescence occurs when the phone can no longer perform it’s intended functions, or the functions themselves become obsolete.

Don’t say that Apple has obsolescence planned or built into the iPhone without explaning why it will be obsolete. A newer better version 2 doesn’t make version 1 obsolete.

Interesting that many characterizes Apple’s marketing as misleading, when the complaints come from what many desire the iPhone to be, not what Apple has claimed it to be. True the omission of many of the features sited here(and everywhere else) should be noted, but no one should fool themselves into believing that Apple didn’t carefully consider them all, and chose from what they believed would be the best business decisions that would allow for the best user experience and growth opportunity.
All must remember that Steve Jobs is extremely savvy. (he’s made many mistakes in the past and has clearly learned from them) I have no doubt that every move made has been carefully calculated.
It will be interesting to see and here the responses when this product actually ships.
I’m truly amazed at how many bloggers, authors, writers and journalist seem to have crystal balls that so many can be so certain about how it can and will perform before any have had an actual chance to handle the device.

Good lord you guys are ripping this thing to shreds! My simple reason for buying the 8GB iPhone is to replace my crappy old cell phone and a 4GB iPod Nano so I don’t have two things to lug around. I could care less about the web, wifi and 3G (I’m on the web all day long at the office anyway). There are probably a lot of people like me thinking of doing the same thing. I think you guys are not looking at the bigger picture and nitpicking this thing to pieces.

About the iPhone.
I am a long time Mac user. I have a Motorola V276 CDMA phone. I don’t use any features but dial out. I can’t seem to remember how to use anything else that it offers. Little buttons obscure clicks!
I do how ever like my MAC and can reinstall and build up a system and do all kinds of things with it, in software as well as hardware. Yes I am an old fart and no I can’t program my VCR. But I use my MAC about 4 to 6 hours a day and no I am not a power user, and yes I would be lost with out my computer. I don’t get into the command line at all. But I love my MAC.
I would buy the iPhone, only if it lets me do things with a phone that I can’t seem to remember how to do with ease now with my Motorola Flip phone.
The one thing that you all seem to not be paying attention to is the fact that NOT EVERY ONE is as tech savvy as you all claim to be. I am not. I don’t claim to be.
There will be a learning curve with this iPhone (as with most things tech), and so Apple will offer new features as people learn to use the ones it has and as people learn to want the features NOT initially included. Why offer the whole ball of wax and just confuse every one all over again. Yes it is nice to have every thing at the get go. But NOT everyone wants everything from the get go.
The feature that I am looking for from the iPhone is not GPS or IM, but a great address book and Calendar that I can carry with me. I want to ditch the Palm Tungsten that I also carry with me, because it does not sync dependably and consistantly with my MAC, so carrying it is a crap shoot. When the battery is dead I have to recharge and to re-sync (maybe) and that gripes my ass.
My Motorola is great but it is like driving the Motorhome to the local store for a quart of milk. I would rather just take my little 300 dollar electric scooter.
Will I get an iPhone. Yes. I won’t stand in line. But I WILL dump my Motorola as soon as I can to get something to use, that is EASY to use in place of it.
Features Smeatures! By putting all the apps in software, it can be more like the MAC and I can go out and get the apps that I want. Or if push comes to shove maybe even learn enough to create some of my own.
Now all Apple has to do is to ramp up the Hardware specs and ride the hardware OEM development curves as the prices from the manufactures come down.
I get enhanced functionality, reduced prices and can be gently educated about what a “mobile” device can do for me?
Is that planned obsolescence? I don’t think so. Is that smart marketing? I do think so. Dudes, your not the only people in the universe.
Jan.

The iPhone will likely have good resale as successive generations are released. I’ve sold several Powerbooks (and soon MacBookPro) for very good prices, the iPhone will be the same. I’m buying it to get a cellphone that is easy to use and to always have internet on me. Every previous phone I’ve had failed on both counts. Don’t care about it as a iPod.

Heh, one poster–who I suspect represents a LOT of potential iPhone customers–just wants a single replacement for his cell phone and iPod. Another wants a cell phone and always-on internet and isn’t bothered about the iPod functionality. As for myself (you may have seen this coming) I’m mostly interested in having an iPod and a decent web experience that fits in my pocket.

Since I’m within reach of Wi-Fi 95% of the time, the lack of 3G means nothing. Besides 3G coverage is pretty much non-existent where I live and will be for at least another 2 years or so. Similarly GPS just isn’t mainstream enough yet for the majority of consumers to care that it’s missing.

I think Apple has cast a pretty wide net in terms of the market segments addressed by the feature set of the 1st generation iPhone. As others have said, with the mass market it’s sometimes less about packing the features in than making them actually useable by the average end user. The vast majority of my friends–people who are young and intelligent, if not geeks–don’t use the features their existing phones have. The trick will be for Apple to convince people like that (most of whom have already been sold on the iPod part) to cough up $500–on the premise that they’ll actually want to us–and be able to use–the features the iPhone does have. It not so much what it does as how it does it.

Also, I wouldn’t be surprised if the lack of IM and VOIP was to pacify AT&T. They’re already losing revenue on account of the Wi-Fi and no music/media sales over their network … so Apple may have had to throw them a bone or two.

In case you hadn’t noticed, WE are all the product of ‘Planned Obsolescence,’ we literally die a little cell by cell everyday so why shoudl the iphone be different?

CRAPPY CELL PHONE $ 200 + IPOD $ 250 = $ 450

Iphone = $ 600

ULTMATE COOL FACTOR COST $ 150

U THINK TOO MUCH, U TALK TOO MUCH, U NOT HAPPY WITH THIS, THEN UDON’T BUY

OTHERS WILL IN DROVES - TO BOYS THIS LIKE MAKING PHONECALLS WITH CAMERON DIAZ’S LEFTHAND, FOR GIRLS LIKE TALKING INTO JUSTIN’S

IPHONE WILL BE BIGGER THAN IPOD ULTIMATELY

@Jan
“My Motorola is great but it is like driving the Motorhome to the local store for a quart of milk. I would rather just take my little 300 dollar electric scooter.
Will I get an iPhone. Yes.”

This is what confuses me. Your Motorola V276 is the motorhome, and the *iPhone* is the $300 electric scooter? You’re talking about a phone that literally costs more than the car in your analogy.

I never suggested the iPhone has to have “everything from the get go.” This is a common, and I think disingenuous, Apple argument - that PCs / non-Apple products are feature-laden and only for the tech-savvy, but Apple only gives you what you need. Jan, if all you want is a phone with contacts and a calendar that synch with your mac, why would you spend $600 to be on Apple’s bleeding-edge? You can get phones that do that for free. The only reason to pay that much for a phone is if it provides something extra; my point, though, was that for that much money I would expect more “extra” from the phone.

So yes, Jan, I agree that Apple must have some “smart marketing” to convince you that the iPhone is ideal precisely because it has fewer features.

dude, did you have a crystal ball or something? you totally nailed it. what do you think they will do to obsolesce the 3G? a video camera that can post directly to youtube/facebook is an obvious one (i have flip mino for that though). enterprise functionality is another, maybe the ability to store/read pdfs and other file types would be nice. the 3G seems like its main target was the introduction of the app store. another cash cow…