The Bomb
Home » Intelligence » The Bomb
"Bomb" in modern slang, is an interesting term. It can mean both a favorable impression ("its the bomb") and a negative one ("its a bomb" or simply, "it bombed"). The question could then be posed, that if the iPhone is to be called such a thing... whether such a statement is praise or damnation.
In predicting this result, many have looked to surveys as early indicators of how perception has been towards the device. Amongst a host of glowing interest, the five largest negatives in iPhone adoption have consistantly been:
- High Price
- Cingular/AT&T
- No 3rd party development support
- No tactile keyboard
- No 3G
These elements represent almost toxic ingredients that have turned a certain percentage of wouldbe buyers, into embittered critics. Ironically, few of these issues substantially effect the market to which Apple has targetted its preliminary roll-out, aimed at 1% of the mobile market. Other elements are only aspects that may fade in the light of positive reviews or anticipated future models.
HIGH PRICES
Price isn't of tremendous importance considering Motorola's RAZR phone debuted with a similar price-point, and quickly became one of Motorola's hottest properties on sheer hype alone (other than thinness, being somewhat devoid of advanced features even for its time). While a $500 phone may be out of the question for average phone shoppers, Apple has cleverly presented the new phone as a next generation iPod/Internet device, which by itself would fetch well over $300-$400 upon rollout. While many high-end phones have embraced carrier subsidies, Apple has foregone this practice in favor of allowing the price to remain unaltered. This strategy would appear to be a very hard decision, but a nevertheless vital aspect of the iPhones position in Apple's iPod productline. Were consumer perception allowed to slide up and down unrealistically (subsidizing the phone cost by $100s of dollars) as it has in the mobile space as a whole, Apple might experience fallout in the perceived value of the other products in that line.
CINGULAR/AT&T
Early speculation about the iPhone in the fall of 2006, had analysts and interested parties question whether Apple would actually become a mobile virtual network operator (MVNO). An MVNO is basically an entity or company that works independently of a specific wireless carrier and can set its own services pricing structures, subject to the pricing structure agreed with each provider. This would have allowed Apple to support many different carriers under its own uniform consumer experience. As noted however, this did not turn out to be true. As such, another criticism has been the iPhones exclusivity of Cingular for a partner.
While a number of people have cited Cingular as a reason for not wanting to buy the device, negative experiences with any carrier have generally shown to be heavily influenced by location and individual handsets. Simply put, some cities have better carrier specific coverage than others, while some phones have better designs than others. One person's negative experiences are best ruled out on a purely anecdotal basis, leaving only survey statistics and subscriber growth reports as the best indicators of consumer sentiment towards a carrier. Another element of derision, whether it be with Cingular (now AT&T) or its AT&T parent company, relates to billing and customer service.
In seeking to circumvent possible complaints, Apple has done something unique with service & billing for its iPhone line. Instead of having subscribers deal directly through the Cingular/AT&T billing systems, Apple has arranged to have its customers manage that relationship directly through iTunes. Whether dealing with the iTunes music store, technical service to its Apple Macintosh computers, or retail store customers... with its high scores for customer service, its clear that Apple seems to understand how to keep its patrons happy. It would only go to follow that early adopters of the iPhone, concerned about negative past exeriences with Cingular/AT&T can expect a totally revamped way of dealing with the mobile carrier. Those wondering if service will be good or bad in their area, or if the iPhone itself will exhibit reception degrading design flaws, may also have to look toward initial feedback from others in their area for any relevant insight into how well this offering will work for them.
NO 3RD PARTY DEVELOPMENT
Part of this criticism is myth. Just as there is 3rd party development on the iPod, there will be 3rd party development on the iPhone. Given the robustness of OSX however, and its newness as a mobile platform, its understandable that Apple is apprehensive over the idea of buggy third party applications flooding unrestricted onto its devices. As such, Apple has decided that it would regulate which apps are and are not allowed to be installed.
One doesn't have to go far before hearing nightmare stories of Windows Mobile or PalmOS devices that require their users to often "reboot" their phones in escaping a thorny round of bad performance and crashing. It usually doesn't matter who wrote the application, it is generally the platform that is blamed for not working properly.
Others have also pointed out that nothing precludes web developers from creating apps for the iPhone, and simply requiring these services be accessed over the Internet. Without fast mobile access, however, this is still less than ideal. Secondly, it has been posited that Apple may allow "widgets" to be installed by third parties, as they are with MacOS X Tiger today. The jury is still out however, and regardless of how many applications Apple allows through its screening process, given the wealth of usability already inherent in the iPhone, this concern remains a point of contention more for the corporate sector than for ordinary consumers.
While consumers are concerned about basic usability issues, the corporate world benefits highly from freely customizeable solutions that address a multitude of business needs. With customizeabilty comes instability however, so it presents a truly challenging balance to strike.
NO TACTILE KEYBOARD
During the time leading towards the iPhone release, up and coming phones like the Samsung Ultra Smart F700 and the Helio Ocean, garnered much critical praise by relying on a "slider" mechanism that allowed them to present a fully tactile QWERTY keyboard, while also presenting ample screen touchscreen realistate. While Apple took great pride in painting the idea of traditional "button" and "stylus" interfaces as relics of the past, this paradigm still enjoys a sizeable support amongst mobile customers. The case is often presented as an problem with the difficulty of "dialing blind" on a purely smooth surface with no tactile cues.
In addressing this, some touchscreen phone makers have experimented with a handful of "force feedback" methods with varying degrees of success. An upcoming and highly regarding technology called VibeTonez, from Immersion Corporation, uses what are called "haptic accuators" to simulate tactical cues. However, while reviewing the VibeTonz enabled Samsung SCH-W559, CNET wrote:
"The technology causes the display to vibrate whenever you touch a menu option or a virtual key, thus giving tactile feedback. You even can adjust the level of vibration--from a soft gentle shake to a full-on rumble. Though this is a step in the right direction in getting feedback from a touch screen phone, it doesn't quite work the way we want. For one thing, you still can't dial by feel--it's still mandatory to look at the phone while you're dialing since there aren't any textural differences between different keys."
A more seasoned alternative input possibility is "voice command". Apple has not stated to what degree voice command may be offered on the iPhone, but even if it were available on shipping it is also an imperfect substitute. Requiring users to speak introduces a perhaps undesireable level of unpredictability and audibility to the experience.
Whether for texting, email or browsing the Internet, its clear tactile keyboards will remain a preferred choice for some consumers if not all. It is worth nothing however, that while the iPhone will not feature an integrated option, there are a variety of larger Bluetooth enabled keyboards for use with cell phones and PDAs. The smallest of these options would be the $99 PDA-sized "freedom mini keyboard" and the credit card sized "freedom slim keypad" (which could easily accompany one's iPhone inside a standard phone case).
NO 3G
The last of the persistant criticisms that bar the iPhone from the consideration of some, is the lack of support for 3G. 3G is seen as the 3rd generation of mobile connectivity technology. 3G characterizes networks fast enough to reasonably perform tasks like simulataneous data/voice transfer, video telephony, exchaning e-mails and/or instant messenging (specifically, throughput rates up to 384Kbps). Globally, two competing standards for 3G are EV-DO and HSUPA. Between conflicting implementations of these technologies, carrier rollout/coverage, battery draining power requirements, and sometimes high connection cost... 3G is still getting its footing.
For instance, the popular Nokia n95 supports HSUPA and is thus a 3G phone, but unfortunately it does not technically support a version of HSUPA that has any support in the U.S. While its not yet known what plans Cingular/AT&T will offer its iPhone users, it seems all too clear that its standard $59 unlimited rate plan may represent the "ballpark" of what consumers can expect. In areas where HSUPA is not yet supported, subscribers would downgrade to EDGE regardless of the support their phone has for 3G.
Depending on the usage patterns of the customer however, any discussion surrounding 3G might well be moot. Out of the box, the iPhone will support either EDGE (seen as 2.5G - rates of up to 114Kbps) or Wi-Fi (802.11b/g) connections. Public Wi-Fi hotspots have long blossomed in their availability (many hotels offering Wi-Fi for free), and the speed of such connections still dwarfs what is possible with a 3G connection. A number of news organizations have delved into this precise question. In April of 2006, an Infoweek article entitled "3G vs. Wi-Fi hotspots" put it this way: "Now that 3G is becoming a viable wide-area wireless solution, is it time to kiss Wi-Fi hotspots goodbye? Not likely. Both will be around for a long time, and each has its distinct advantages and disadvantages. For your company, the choice depends on budget and where and how often your users travel and need to connect."
TechTarget published an insightful state-of-the-industry review of 3G vs. WiFi (requires subscription).
They conclude: "Ultimately, no single wireless internet access method can optimize availability, price and performance for all applications. According to Gartner, cellular (3G/4G) services will be dominant for truly mobile workers by 2010, but most remote workers will require multiple access technologies. Instead of choosing 3G or Wi-Fi, we may buy both and decide which to use at any given moment, based on availability, speed, cost and other policy attributes."
While Apple reportedly sees a 3G iPhone arriving in 2008, depending on technology trends, adoption of the WiMax or 802.16e standard may also be highly advantageous. It seems clear that in this evolving space, rushing iPhone support for 3G may not yield more benefit than is justifiable from the resources required to integrate it in its first round. In parting, an early article in the NY Times suggested that "several Apple insiders" said that at a future date, Apple could theoretically update the iPhone to support a 3G connection via software, if it so chose. Considering the requirement that Apple actively under-utilize a more expensive piece of hardware (supporting the higher transmission capabilities of 3G), other industry watchers have discounted this as highly unlikely, however much the idea might appeal to potential customers.