#iphone

John Gruber, ripping apart this piece by Joe Nocera:

The iPad was “just a big iPhone” when it was unveiled in 2010; today it’s hailed as Apple’s last great new product. My guess is we’ll see the same reaction to whatever Apple releases this year. It takes years for even the most amazing of new products — the iPhone, for example — to prove themselves on the market. It’s a long game.

Even then — come, say, 2017, when Apple is reaping billions in profits from some product first introduced this year — the doomed-without-Jobs crowd could (and I bet will) just argue that the product succeeded only because it had been conceived while Steve Jobs was alive. It’ll never stop.

A fun exercise would be to write Apple critiques years in advance and see just how close they are when the stories hit in the future. I bet they’d be pretty close. It’s like paint-by-numbers for the tech press.

Jason Snell:

In other words, in four years the wearables market might grow to be one-tenth the size of today’s smartphone market—in units shipped. Presumably the average selling price of wearable items will be a fraction of that of smartphones, meaning the dollar value of the wearables market is even more minuscule compared to the smartphone market.

All of which means that wearables, while dramatic and exciting and with huge potential to change people’s lives, are never going to rival smartphones in terms of market size. Same goes for smart TV boxes. These are interesting, fun areas of technological change. But the smartphone—that boring old Internet-connected 64-bit supercomputer in your pocket that just keeps improving year after year—is going to be the big dog in the tech world for years to come. Apple’s future success or failure will be dependent on the iPhone, and to a lesser extent the iPad, not on a smartwatch.

That’s exactly right. I’ve been saying this for a while: there is no industry, save maybe the oil business, that could yield the type of profits Apple is used to with the iPhone. And that points to a lot of disappointment in the eyes of Wall Street no matter what comes — unless Apple buys Exxon.

blogoculaire asked:

What is the percentage of time you use your iPad(s)/iPhone versus PC/MacBook(s). Can you make it to 100% soon?

I’d say it’s probably 70/30 on iDevices vs. MacBook. Most of the MacBook Air time is work-related. And that figure is so heavily tilted in the iDevices favor because I use the iPhone far more than any other device.

That said, when it comes to “general computing”, I much prefer to use the iPad Air (with the Logitech keyboard) for almost everything. But I suspect a rumored 12” Retina MacBook Air could tilt the numbers back in the MacBook favor, if only temporarily.

We don’t take so long and make the way we make for fiscal reasons. Quite the reverse. The body is made from a single piece of machined aluminium. The whole thing is polished first to a mirror finish and then is very finely textured, except for the Apple logo. The chamfers are cut with diamond-tipped cutters. The cutters don’t usually last very long, so we had to figure out a way of mass-manufacturing long-lasting ones. The camera cover is sapphire crystal. Look at the details around the sim-card slot. It’s extraordinary!
Jony Ive, describing his iPhone to John Arlidge.

corynadilo asked:

When do you think 32GB will be the floor for iPhones? My last two phones I have opted for 32GB which I am about out growing now. $200 premium for a measly 64GB is highway robbery in 2014.

Yeah, I’d imagine (though have no actual knowledge) that we’ll see a 128GB iPhone in the next iteration. Maybe that means the end of the 16GB model, or maybe it means that’s reserved for the more affordable version. 

The one thing working in the other direction is the movement of all entertainment to the cloud. That is, Spotify, Beats, Rdio, iTunes in the Cloud, etc, allow you to keep a lot less music stored on your device these days (though some is saved for offline capabilities, of course).

Still, while that has alleviated some of the need for a lot of storage, apps continue to grow in size — particularly games. Many are over 1GB now. 16GB seems untenable. And 128GB seems inevitable. (And that should drive the price down of the 64GB models, etc.) 

Update: As, of course, as my buddy Cap notes, photos and videos are driving this need for more storage perhaps above all else.

Suzanne Vranica:

Samsung gave ABC smartphones to use during the broadcast and was promised its devices would get airtime, these people said. At least one of the product plugs was planned: during the “red carpet” preshow, ABC ran a clip of six aspiring young filmmakers touring Disney Studios. The group were seen in the video using Samsung devices.

The origin of the “selfie” shot was a little different. Ms. DeGeneres, in the days leading up to the broadcast, decided she wanted to take “selfies” during the show and ABC suggested she use a Samsung since it was a sponsor, another person familiar with the matter said.

"Suggested".

Better yet:

During rehearsals Samsung executives trained Ms. DeGeneres on how to use the Samsung Galaxy, two people familiar with the matter said.

"Trained".

And the kicker:

The Samsung stunt didn’t come off without a hitch: many people were quick to note on Twitter that the Oscar host was also tweeting during the evening with rival Apple’s iPhone.

Backstage, of course.

Some Thoughts On Facebook Paper

I’ve been trying out Facebook’s latest app, Paper1, all day and thought I’d post some initial thoughts.

1) It’s very well done. Some of the design seems a bit heavy-handed at times, but it’s responsive and sleek.

2) I’ve already replaced the standard Facebook app on my phone with Paper. It has basically everything you need from Facebook except Events, which you have to assume is another one of the stand-alone apps they’re working on.

Read More

Jean-Louis Gassée:

Picture two iPhone users. One has a spanking new iPhone 5S, the other has an iPhone 5 that he bought last year. What do you see? Two smartphone users of equally discerning taste who, at different times, bought the top-of-the-line product. The iPhone 5 user isn’t déclassé, he’s just waiting for the upgrade window to open.

Now, replace the iPhone 5 with an iPhone 5C. We see two iPhones bought at the same time… but the 5C owner went for the cheaper, plastic model.

We might not like to hear psychologists say we build parts of our identity with objects we surround ourselves with, but they’re largely right. From cars, to Burberry garments and accessories, to smartphones, the objects we choose mean something about who we are — or who we want to appear to be.

This is a subtle point, but I believe it’s exactly right. With the iPhone 5c, what you ended up having was a (very) visual clue to others that you went out of your way to buy a cheaper iPhone. Right or wrong, that’s likely the first message being conveyed.

Previously, if you bought the $99 iPhone (or the $0 two-year-old variety), all that was conveyed was that you may have just had the old top-of-the-line version and were waiting to upgrade.

Apple’s position as a premium brand cuts both ways. And that’s too bad because the iPhone 5c really is a great iPhone.

Jay Haynes takes me to task on a point I made recently:

MG Siegler noted that Apple “wants to be the ones to disrupt themselves… But never with stakes this high…”. But I would argue the stakes were incredibly high when Apple decided to disrupt the Mac and the iPod (both about 100% of their revenue) at the same time. And history is a good indication that Apple is probably thinking about disrupting the iPhone, even now. A truly disruptive product to the iPhone might not emerge for years, but I can’t think of another company that would prepare for and execute a self-disruption strategy like Apple. It is in their culture to do it, as long as the new product is insanely great. As a result, Apple deserves a higher future growth rate than the market is currently giving it.

Sure, I guess what I meant was that the stakes have never been this high in terms of the revenue. Of course Apple wants to be the one to disrupt the iPhone and they’re thinking about it — I’m just not convinced it’s possible to replace such a high level or revenue. And that’s not a knock on Apple, I’m not sure anyone can. The iPhone is just that good of a business.

Another point Haynes makes that I absolutely agree with:

Microsoft made the mistake of targeting the “iPod market” with the Zune. But JTBD theory shows us that there is no such thing as an iPod market, just as there isn’t a cassette market, an LP market, or a CD market. Companies get disrupted because they define the market based on their product, not on the customers job-to-be-done, e.g. the markets for listening to music and discovering new music.

That’s exactly the right way to think about it. It’s the end, not the means.

The iPhone Company

It’s Apple earnings day which means two things:

1) Wall Street freaking out amidst record numbers.

2) Lots of people on Twitter linking to lots of different charts trying to explain Apple’s quarter.

I’m pretty sure we’ve reached peak chart.

The issue is that the only real things these charts show at this point is that Apple is both a habitual company and a money-making machine. And, to some extent, they prove the law of large numbers. The charts aren’t going up-and-to-the-right as fast as they used to because well, there are only so many people in the world who can buy Apple products.

Read More