iPhone

[Joe Matt]

Originally Posted by Wetzel

Ok, I'll amend my question.

No mobile highspeed internets?

As for "fraud Apple battery market", have you seen a problem with any other phone? You can buy brand name, or non brandname batterys for just about any electronic device that needs them. 5 hours talk time, with no option to cary a spare battery? Guess Apple isn't targeting power users.
No expandable memory because other products might hurt the iPhone? Then use a standard like SD (or SDHC to be sexy). Not including features because someone else might make a product that might damage what you are selling is ridiculous.

Wetzel

I'm no means appologizing for Apple, just trying to get into their heads here...

I do remember awhile ago that Moto and several other companies were looking into exploding cell phone batteries (no relation to Sony) that were 3rd party and crappy.

[MattK]

Word on the street says there will be a CMDA version available within the next 2 years. I dont see Apple and Verizon playing nice though. Maybe it will be available on Sprint/Nextel?

[Joe Matt]

Originally Posted by MattK

Word on the street says there will be a CMDA version available within the next 2 years. I dont see Apple and Verizon playing nice though. Maybe it will be available on Sprint/Nextel?

I agree, I also see the iPhone having parallels with the iPod, we'll soon see a iPhone nano or some sort that'll just be a small candybar phone.

As for who's next, the exclusivity contract is only for 6 months. Apple then has to convience others to change their system around for things like Visual Voicemail, and my guess is that T-Mobile will be next, then possibly Sprint/Nextel. I think Verizon will get on board but that won't happen till Apple's selling a bunch.

[Wetzel]

Oh nose! Lawsuit!

Apple hadn't finished their talks with Cisco over the iPhone trademark and went ahead and announced it anyway. Cisco thought that wasn't very nice of them and so they filed for an injunction. Bad Apple! No iPhone for you!

Wetzel

[Michael Hill]

I'd have to side with Cisco on this one. Though people anticipated Apple to come out with an iPhone, Cisco DID come out with it first. Also, how fair would it be if Apple tried to trademark anything with "i-" anything or the term "pod". They may have made the terms popular, but they certainly don't own them.

[Joe Matt]

Originally Posted by Michael Hill

I'd have to side with Cisco on this one. Though people anticipated Apple to come out with an iPhone, Cisco DID come out with it first. Also, how fair would it be if Apple tried to trademark anything with "i-" anything or the term "pod". They may have made the terms popular, but they certainly don't own them.

Except for the whole fact that they haven't actually ENFORCED the trademark yet, making it all null and void, such as here and here.

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/01/10/ilawsuit/

Apple spokesman Steve Dowling called the Cisco lawsuit “silly,” adding there are several companies using the term iPhone for VOIP products, and Cisco’s trademark is “tenuous at best.” “We’re the first company to ever use the iPhone name for a cellphone,” he said. “If Cisco wants to challenge us on it, we’re very confident we’ll prevail.”

[Maximus123]

Originally Posted by KTorak

I interpreted the $499/$599 as actual retail price. Sorry about that.

It's alright. Cingular is one of the best carriers I've ever seen. Apple knew what they were doing when they released this without consent/ full rights from Cisco. Cisco's stock went up and Apple's went down. That hurts them even more since they spent so much money developing and keeping this project hidden for so long. I would laugh if Cisco copied that idea for the next generation Iphones and made it cheap, and unlocked for any company. :

[KTorak]

Originally Posted by Maximus123

It's alright. Cingular is one of the best carriers I've ever seen. Apple knew what they were doing when they released this without consent/ full rights from Cisco. Cisco's stock went up and Apple's went down. That hurts them even more since they spent so much money developing and keeping this project hidden for so long. I would laugh if Cisco copied that idea for the next generation Iphones and made it cheap, and unlocked for any company. :

Maybe it was a post here...but quite possibly Slashdot...but there was a link showing that the lawyer who represents Cisco (as well as the law firm) for Trademark cases ALSO represents Apple in Trademark cases. Which I find quite interesting...

[Pavan Dave]

Hold your horses guys. Although apple announched the iPhone, it may not be called that for too long.

They are being sued for trademark infringment by Cisco because they have a product they called the iPhone for the VoIP services or something. Read more in this article, its pretty interesting.

http://www.computerworld.com/action/...9&pageNumber=1

Pavan.

[Andy A.]

Non replaceable battery.

No high speed wireless data.

No third party development.

Seems like apple is up to it's old habits of not playing nice with others, locking you into their products and having to upgrade frequently.
Battery is toast? Upgrade.
Want to surf the web quickly? Wait a while and you'll be able to upgrade to a 3G version.
Want Outlook on your phone? To bad, it's an Apple. Go play with a widget and find out the what the weather is going to be like.

The only thing the Iphone does well is serve as a status symbol, till everyone else has one. Then it becomes an expensive cellphone with terrible battery life.

-Andy A.

[Adam Richards]

Originally Posted by Pavan

Hold your horses guys. Although apple announched the iPhone, it may not be called that for too long.

They are being sued for trademark infringment by Cisco because they have a product they called the iPhone for the VoIP services or something. Read more in this article, its pretty interesting.

http://www.computerworld.com/action/...9&pageNumber=1

Pavan.

I wasn't expecting this one bit...

Originally Posted by Adam Richards

I'm waiting for Cisco, who owns the copyright on the name "iPhone" to sue Apple for marketing a product with the same name as theirs.

Originally Posted by Bill Moore

Looks like the lawyers lose this one!
Article here.

[Joe Matt]

Originally Posted by Adam Richards

I wasn't expecting this one bit...

Do you actually read anything I post or talk to you in AIM about Adam?

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Burnette/?p=236

Actually, does ANYONE read them?

*edit*

I want to add that I've heard that the Cingular contract is 2 years and covers any future iPhone models....

[SamC]

Apple is finally gonna start selling these iPhones! June 29th, who is gonna get one?

Here is a Yahoo story about it, http://www.yahoo.com/s/596572
AT&T/Cingular info on it, URL too long to post. Here it is
Apple.com ads on it, http://www.apple.com/iphone/ads/

[Joe Matt]

Originally Posted by SamSofa330

Apple is finally gonna start selling these iPhones! June 26th, who is gonna get one?

Here is a Yahoo story about it, http://www.yahoo.com/s/596572
AT&T/Cingular info on it, URL too long to post. Here it is
Apple.com ads on it, http://www.apple.com/iphone/ads/

Uhhhhhhhh............... I think you mean June 29th, right?

[SamC]

Originally Posted by Joe Matt

Uhhhhhhhh............... I think you mean June 29th, right?

yeah i did...