While we may not think that the 4G iPhone is an enormous upgrade, it’s all about the cameras, and that’s specifically the area we’re hooked on. So for some 5 megapixel camera love (plus flash and HD video recording), the new iPhone has us interested. We bought the 3GS upon release, so we should be eligible for the discounted upgrade, but… we’re not.

We pre-ordered our iPhone 3GS to replace our 2G iPhone on T-Mobile, activating it on day one of 3GS availability. About half a year later, we converted our plan to a family plan, and then added a line for our girlfriend. There was also some hooplah about converting the plan to be region-free, since we both ported numbers from different area codes. During all this reshuffling, her phone somehow became the “primary” number on the account, which was inconsequential until today.

When we checked to see if our phone was eligible for the discounted upgrade, we were told it wasn’t, and that we would have to wait until February. The second line we added, however, even though activated half a year later, was already eligible, even though the reverse should be true. Apparently, AT&T can’t fix this in the system, because even if they switch the original phone back to be the primary, that switch alone causes a three-month penalty for future upgrades. So because AT&T didn’t set things up the way initially requested (presumably because it was easier for the salesperson who set up our second phone), I now can’t upgrade at the lowest cost possible. Why AT&T can’t simply swap upgrade eligibility between phones remains a mystery, considering that both phones are on the same plan, billed to the same person.

For us, this is a major complaint against AT&T, especially since the customer sales representative we spoke to today had major attitude when we politely addressed the issue and the reason for our dissatisfaction. This from a company we’ve defended from daily onslaught by other iPhone users. Thanks, AT&T. You have one more year from us, and then you better hope you’re still the only US iPhone carrier.Similar Posts:

• Replace an iPhone using different-line upgrade eligibility. – It’s upsetting that AT&T wasn’t clearer on this before we decided to rant, especially since their ow…
• iPhones are not being bricked. – It wasn’t that long ago that real “tech words” never entered Average Joe’s vernacular. These days, t…
• Apple and Cingular are an unholy marriage. – When two companies get together for exclusivity agreements, it takes freedom out of the consumer’s h…
• Getting an iPhone 3G sans contract: the costs. – In what should be illegal, AT&T is charging $700 for a 16GB iPhone that’s not contracted to them…
• Why the 3G iPhone will be “meh” for unlockers. – Some people are wetting their pants over the prospect of a 3G iPhone coming out next month (or this …

One of the common quips about the iPad is that it’s nothing more than a “large iPod Touch.” It’s a statement the naysayers are fond of making, along with those who lash out at anything made by Apple as though Microsoft were still the only developer putting out a useful, solid operation system anymore; it’s not 1999, people.

We’ve now had an iPad since Friday, the day the 3G iPads were released, and we’re quite happy with it as a replacement for our now-sold 17″ Macbook Pro. We’ve fielded numerous questions, but the most common is, “Why would someone want an iPad?” And that’s a loaded question, because it comes with a pre-established bias. But let’s answer it anyway: “Maybe you don’t. Not everyone would.”

That answer isn’t side-stepping the argument, either. The reality is, if you’re already happy with an existing portable computer, or you don’t need a portable computer in the first place, then the iPad isn’t for you, just as a roadster isn’t the ideal car for a family of four. If you’re in the market for a portable computer, however, and what you need it to do is the same thing 99% of computer users need a computer for, then the iPad fits the bill splendidly. It’s a fantastic entertainment and news device, is great for writing, and the distribution system for apps makes the iPad a headache-free device which you won’t need to reformat every six months because something’s broken.

And for techies who need the latest and greatest, and have the disposable income to make that need a reality, then the iPad is an obvious choice over an existing sub-notebook: it’s snappier, has a great app library w/associated distribution system, has a longer battery life, and has a data connection built in.

With four days of iPad use behind us, we’re not disappointed with the device at all, and look forward to the benefits that OS 4.0 will bring later this year. One side-effect of using the iPad, however, is our changed perception of using the iPhone. Quite simply, the iPhone no longer feels as revolutionary, or as spectacular, as before. Indeed, we’re making an effort to not run iPhone apps on the iPad, because most simply don’t look great when scaled up. That’s not to say that the iPhone still isn’t the best smartphone on the market, but merely that the iPhone now feels more like a phone with cool features, and less like a backup computing device; the iPhone feels almost cluttered now, what with its dense app icon distribution on the SpringBoard, and the lack of “whitespace” in apps.

In this respect, the iPad has set for the computing industry a new standard. What early, greyscale sub-notebooks were to their later, more powerful notebook brethren, the iPod Touch is to the iPad. In other words, the iPad isn’t a big iPod Touch, in much the same way the modern Mini Cooper isn’t just a bigger version of the old Mini. Yes, there are keen visual similarities, but one was effectively a prototype for the other. In the end, the Touch is a smaller, more restricted version of the iPad, which is a more apt description if any can be made, and it pinpoints the answer to the aforementioned question as to why one would want an iPad: early iPod adopters didn’t ask why they should pick up an iPod instead of one of the many non-Apple mp3 players on the market. Rather, the reason was obvious: the iPod was better, not because it offered much more functionality, but because it was highly polished. Those who didn’t see this would end up buying an iPod a year or three later. Same with the iPad: if you don’t get it now, just wait a couple years when the early-adopters have made the reasoning all to clear.

Similar Posts:

• Point of the iTablet? Try these variants. – All this talk about the iTablet, and we’re still confused as to what the ultimate point is. Not abou…
• iPad extensibility: the key is in the adapters? – While the iPad won’t sport much more than a dock connector for interfacing with other devices, that …
• Initial thoughts on the iPad. – We weren’t exactly surprised with Apple’s revealing of the iPad today. Aside from our dislike of “iP…
• We’re lovin’ the iPad hate. – And we love it because it just makes people sound ignorant, or flat-out trollish. That’s not to say …
• The iPhone is cheap? – Since getting his hands on an iPhone, Michael of Apple Gazette has been running a column entitled “3…

While we brought the Joo Joo up in passing, Rob Enderle proclaimed that the former CrunchPad could crush the market for tablet computing, thereby souring Apple’s entrance into the market altogether. The only problem with his assertion is that the Apple tablet isn’t the same beast as the Joo Joo, and to say that the latter will quell consumer desire for the iTablet is like saying that Motorola’s Razr savaged the Apple iPhone.

Enderle is really comparing apples to oranges (no pun intended); all of these non-Apple products are extremely limited: the Kindle is first and foremost an eBook reader, the Razr is just a cellphone, and the Joo Joo is a web-surfing tool. For those like Enderle who still don’t get it, the Joo Joo is a one-trick pony. It’s not a media monster running iTunes, it isn’t a keyboard-less computer with the capacity to run OS X applications, and it certainly doesn’t have the potential packing of the print industry to push forward with digital distribution of magazines and newspapers.

Most consumers probably haven’t even heard of the Joo Joo and its developer, Fusion Garage. The Joo Joo will cost $500, and for what’s probably just twice that, users will be able to own an Apple-polished product that does significantly more. So even if news of the Joo Joo does trickle down to the average computer user, we’re not so sure anyone’s going to care, especially once Apple announces their own tablet (which will be an actual computer and not just a web-browser).

But what can we expect from a tech analyst with such stunning gems as this:

[It] sounds way to close to JewJew with implications that could offend a wide variety of buyers…

You’re right, Enderle, that’s what’s going to make the Joo Joo fail.Similar Posts:

• Will MacBook evolution lead to the iTablet? – We’ve ruminated at length about the rumoured Apple tablet computer, from the iPhone “dock” that is o…
• If Apple made sex toys. – Apple makes sleek, polished products, in both appearance and functionality. No surprise then that th…
• Apple netbook not as ludicrous as some think. – At Apple Gazette, Michael made a post about why Apple wouldn’t release a netbook, pointing out how …
• The Mac Mini needs to eat the AppleTV, and shoot up with TiVo. – At the end of an article at TUAW talking about the possibility of the Mac Mini and AppleTV both tra…
• Apple for the masses? – Finally, there’s an affordable Apple computer in town, which was shown last week at the MacWorld exp…

Since we picked up an iPhone 3GS a couple months back, our jailbroken/unlocked 2G iPhone has been sitting on a shelf collecting dust, as though a forgotten relic in the battle against Big Apple. Now forced to use AT&T, which drops calls at an alarming rate compared to our experience with the 2G iPhone on T-Mobile, we’re still happy with our service overall, if only because the iPhone user experience, occasional dropped call or not, is still better than using any other cellular phone in the United States. Yes, that’s how great the iPhone 3GS is, and why Apple’s market dominance in this area continues to swell.

That said, the iPhone isn’t perfect, and one of the imperfect things about it is the fact that Big Apple is doing its damndest to keep the iPhone user experience consistent, and in doing so, limiting the types of applications that developers can release in the AppStore. Now, admittedly, the need to jailbreak an iPhone in order to run third-party “homebrew” applications is no longer what it was when we first decided to hack our 2G iPhone two years ago. Quite simply, the AppStore has evolved into a pretty nice store, with a great selection of apps that do most everything we need to. And where it doesn’t offer a particular app that we’d like it to, in most every case, that kind of app isn’t available in Cydia either. That is, except for three that we consider must-haves, two of which we mentioned in our mendax.iphone article. Specifically, we’re talking about Backgrounder (which lets us run any application in the background), SBSettings (a quick way to toggle settings on/off), and the more recent GV Mobile (the infamous Google Voice client).

While our experience using GV Mobile hasn’t been flawless (the app crashes consistently when changing forwarding numbers), an update is on its way. With no word on whether Apple will ultimately approve or deny the official Google Voice app, GV Mobile is our only hope for using Google Voice on our iPhone today. Having access to SBSettings again is a fresh walk down memory lane, and significantly reduces the need for us to jump into Settings to enter airplane mode, as we can now easily turn off select services when we need to save some battery life. Plus, we can now disable everything except wireless, which is nice if we want to use, say, Virgin America’s in-flight wireless (even though, realistically, we’ll almost always have our MacBook Pro with us for such trips). But Backgrounder, assuming it works as well as it did on our 2G iPhone, is the cornerstone of the must-have jailbreak scene. Finally, we can keep Pandora running while switching to Google Maps (or a GPS application), or keep active any other audio programs while fiddling with whatever other apps we need to.

But enough about why we decided to jailbreak again. Let’s get back to how. While the process for jailbreaking is amazingly easy these days for older iPhones, the 3GS has been a different story. Until very recently, jailbreaking tools developed by the iPhone Dev-Team didn’t work on the 3GS. Even now that they do, how to upgrade a non-jailbroken 3.0.x iPhone 3GS to 3.1 and put a jailbreak in place isn’t a solution readily advertised. Even the guides at iClarified aren’t entirely accurate. After spending too many hours this past weekend figuring it all out, it’s time to share our procedure.

1. Obviously, back up your iPhone and sync it with iTunes before you begin.
2. If you haven’t already, download the 3.1 iPhone update via iTunes, but don’t install it.
3. If you no longer have it, download the 3.0.0 iPhone update. The iClarified guide says you can alternately use the 3.0.1 update, but it did not work for us.
4. Jump into a terminal window, and type the following commands:

   cd /etc/
   sudo pico hosts

   You’ll have to input your admin password at this point, after which you’ll be in a simple text editor window. Use the arrow keys to get down to the bottom of the document, and add the following line at the end:

   74.208.105.171 gs.apple.com

   Hit Ctrl+X to exit, press Y to save, and hit return to overwrite the old hosts file. What this step does is redirect iTunes to a jailbreak-friendly server for firmware updates, instead of relying on Apple’s servers to control which firmware updates you’re allowed to receive and use on the iPhone.

5. Download redsn0w v0.8 and run it. You’ll be prompted for the 3.0 firmware file. Follow the prompts, and at the end of the redsn0w process, you’ll have a jailbroken 3.0.0 iPhone 3GS.
6. Now, download PwnageTool 3.1.3. Run it, and click on the expert mode icon. Select the 3GS icon, and proceed with the program. Make sure the program uses the 3.1 firmware update. Refer to Step Six of this second iClarified guide. If you are an AT&T subscriber, ensure that “Activate the phone.” remains unchecked. If you check this box, you will be unable to get new carrier settings from iTunes. Also, it’s not likely that you need to mess with the partition size, so don’t worry about it.
7. You can follow the rest of the iClarified guide, but don’t worry about putting your iPhone in restore mode. Instead, once PwnageTool is done and has output a custom 3.1 firmware package, jump into iTunes, hold down the option key, and click on the Restore button from the iPhone screen. You will be prompted for a firmware update: choose the custom firmware file, and let iTunes do the rest. When your iPhone finally reboots, it will be jailbroken, and Cydia/Icy will be installed.
8. You can now sync the phone from your last backup to restore all your old apps and such. You’ll also be prompted for the 5.5 AT&T carrier file, which you’ll need to install to enable MMS.

At this point, you’ll have a fully-jailbroken iPhone 3GS running at the latest firmware revision. Jump into Cydia and install jailbroken apps to your hearts content!Similar Posts:

• Upgrading a jailbroken iPhone from 2.0 to 2.0.1. – It was only a couple weeks ago that we detailed our process for upgrading a 2G iPhone to firmware 2….
• How to jailbreak and unlock a 2G iPhone (2.0). – The iPhone Dev Team, a group of hackers who have made it their mission to jailbreak and unlock iPhon…
• Upgrade to iOS 4 and lose cellular data? – A number of people have reported losing data over AT&T when upgrading older iPhones to iOS 4. The cu…
• On unlocking my iPhone. – Those following my Twitter status know that I finally broke down and purchased an iPhone, with the o…
• Little reason left for jailbreaking. – When jailbreaking first began on the iPhone, allowing users to install third-party applications, the…

Despite Apple’s sordid foray into the video gaming market with the ill-fated Pippin, TUAW’s Mike Schramm believes that Apple is willing to give console gaming another go. His speculation is based in large part on a piece by Erik Sherman at BNET, in which Sherman notes various patents Apple filed, and various individuals Apple hired, as evidence of Apple’s gaming console initiative.

No TV console aspirations.

We’ll address Schramm first, by noting that an escapade into console-gaming-land would be a horribly poor move for Apple. Apple’s success with the iPod, and later the iPhone, was due to them being able to put a decently-priced but amazingly polished device into consumer’s hands. Before the iPod, mp3 players weren’t particularly notable aside from the fact that they existed at all. Apple pretty much defined the portable mp3 market, and arguably, created the mainstream movement towards legal mp3 downloads. With the iPhone, Apple entered a market densely packed with crappy phones, where even the best sported comparably poor user interfaces and little real online functionality. With the AppStore, Apple blew the doors open on downloadable content, and once again redefined a market, now being emulated by contenders.

The console market is nothing like the portable music or cell phone markets were before Apple got involved. The console market consist of only three key players, all of whom do a great job at building systems, and all of whom have significant industry backing in the form of third-party titles. Plus, all have an indy developer component, and significant mindshare among consumers.

That’s not to say that Apple couldn’t be successful by entering the console wars, but their timing would be way off. Releasing a console before circa 2013, when Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony will reveal their latest offerings, would be dooming an Apple console to irrelevance in only four years time. Furthermore, Apple would fight an uphill battle, akin to what Microsoft dealt with when they unveiled the original XBox. Only, Apple’s experience with the mainstream gaming market (Microsoft had years of experience dealing with PC gaming), is virtually null prior to the proliferation of iPhone games. Simply put, the console marketplace is too volatile a place for Apple to push itself into – the competition is too fierce, so why take an unnecessary risk? Apple is better suited to define a market with much less competition, and the handheld gaming market is a prime target.

The accidental success.

We’re not so sure that Apple expected to be successful with iPhone gaming. Surely, Apple expected to find games developed for the iPhone, but titles from big-name publishers using big-name IP? Maybe Apple even built the iPhone hardware to be capable of running games with decent graphics and framerates, but the very lack of input options makes us question Apple’s expectations that the iPhone might become a veritable Gameboy and PSP competitor. But here we are: leveraging the AppStore’s framework, the iPhone is able to market pretty amazing games via a convenient, cutting-edge distribution model, all for a much cheaper price than games released for the Gameboy or PSP. Like the proliferation of the Wii, iPhone gaming is build on a solid foundation of more casual titles, but as time goes on, we’re now seeing more and more “mature” titles requiring more of a user’s focus. It’s one thing for Apple to have given Mac gaming a mere head-nod in the past, it’s another for Apple to dismiss a clearly growing phenomenon. So, Apple will continue embracing iPhone gaming, and that’s at the heart of Sherman’s observations.

The acquisition of Bob Dreblin, Raka Koduri, Mark Papermaster, and Richard Teversham, might not even indicate Apple assembling a “dream team” for the iPhone gaming market, but let’s assume this to be true. Dreblin’s contribution to the Gamecube CPU may be most telling: the Gamecube was underpowered compared to offerings from Microsoft and Sony, but the thing was admittedly compact. If anything, the rest of the team would play into embedded gaming just as easily as they would in traditional console gaming, not to mention Apple’s acquisition of PA Semi and their investment in PowerVR. If Apple’s going to be serious about iPhone gaming, they’ll want to develop hardware specific for that purpose, especially since this kind of specialized hardware will still be able to power the thousands of non-gaming iPhone applications. By controlling the hardware supply chain specifically, Apple ensures that the competition won’t be building similar products, and furthermore, secures its hardware from additional vulnerabilities.

Sherman makes some good observations about Apple’s patent filings. If anything, it should be pretty clear that Apple is looking to link gaming and outside media. Much as iTunes can suggest music based on one’s existing music library, application 20080076495 proposes similar functionality, only rather than just making recommendations, games could identify appropriate music to play based on a user’s preference. For example, a scene in a game calling for fast-paced, action-packed combat, may query a user’s music library for metal or hard rock music, and based on the user’s ratings, will play a top song in that category. In other words, games will be minimally tailored to suit the user’s tastes based on other media they own. The patent application, at absolute minimum, forms an extension to the iTunes store, in that games may be recommended based on songs a user owns: lots of metal songs may mean a user prefers more action-oriented games, for instance.

The other patent applications Sherman identifies give further insight into Apple’s direction with iPhone games, but it should be pretty clear by now that Apple is looking at solidifying the iPhone game user-base. Arguably, Apple is already ahead of the game with their application distribution model, as Nintendo and Sony are now moving ahead with their own online stores. The difference is that the iPhone is a more flexible system, is nearly always connected to the internet, and meets an application price-point easily suited for growth. By the time the AppStore starts including games costing $20 or higher, the handheld gaming market will be a shitstorm of competition, because Apple will have become a major contender well before that, assuming the next iPhone version further advances a long-term gaming plan (and the 3GS appears to herald this). At that time, Nintendo and Sony better have stepped up their game, because unlike with the traditional console market, the handheld market is far more malleable, especially when the iPhone’s chief gaming success is drawing spontaneous buyers into a web of easily-accessible, easily-downloadable content.

So for those longing for an Apple console, look no further than your iPhone. While it’s already successfully integrated the iPod and cell phone, it’s now looking to devour your friendly neighborhood Gameboy, too.Similar Posts:

• Microsoft wants another monopoly, or, the Vivendi Deal. – Microsoft is yet again reaching out with greedy hands for a bigger market share in the console gamin…
• Let the iPhone gaming begin. – Ah, cell phone gaming. It’s almost an oxymoron considering the poor attempts at real gaming on cell …
• Transitioning the Apple TV into a gaming console. – Some dude, Michael Pachter, a gaming analyst, claims that the Apple TV will soon be hooked up to the…
• Microsoft overlooking the trade-in crowd. – Sony is trying everything they can to lure people into buying the PS3, and at this point, they prett…
• Cell phone gaming. – While clowns like the guys behind the NGage tried their hand at mobile gaming via cell phones, the i…

What’s most interesting about the iPhone feature chart posted earlier today by The iPhone Blog isn’t the evolution of the iPhone since 2007, but that the chart makes the 3G S stand out over the other models by its evolutionary leap. That’s not to say that we think the 3G S is hugely innovative, but that it’s more innovative compared to the 3G than the 3G was to the 2G iPhone. This is particularly noticeable when we begin factoring in not only the iPhone’s 3.0 OS, but the availability of jailbreak-enabled applications: with MMS, tethering, and video recording all features enabled after a jailbreak, the 2G iPhone and iPhone 3G have few differences (albeit the major one: 3G network speed).

While AT&T’s 3G network was bumpy at best when the iPhone 3G was released, it’s much more stable one year later, and we can say with glee that our network experience on the 3G S has been fantastic, to the point where we’d certainly feel weighed down by the 2G iPhone’s EDGE limitation. We’ve even forgotten a couple times when we were on our home broadband network – that’s how fast our 3G connection has been: little noticeable difference between it and wi-fi.

So sure, the 3G S sports more unique features than the 3G did compared to its own predecessor, but how earth-shattering are these new features? Beyond testing video recording, we don’t anticipate using the upgraded camera for video outside of a few special circumstance (which could change, perhaps). Still images, however, especially improved thanks to a tappable auto-focus, have suddenly made the camera far more useful, to the point where we’ll likely retire our Pentax Optio S for everything except macro photography. The 3G S’ compass is a novelty item in itself (the app), but its integration with other apps is what will make it killer. Already, we’ve found our Google Maps experience greatly improved, and once we start seeing great turn-by-turn apps available, and the use of the compass in other apps (e.g. Geocaching), the presence of the digital compass will truly shine.

As far as voice control goes, we haven’t used the application outside a quick test run, which proved fruitless; we’d prefer to see functionality akin to Google Search, such that we can perform web searches straight from the voice control app. With its primary focus on telephone calling, the voice control app doesn’t do anything we couldn’t with apps from Installer.app back in 2007, though perhaps we’ll utilize it more with the iPod once we have more hands-on experience with it. The Nike+ integration is another nice feature, and we’ll probably whip out our ailing Nike+ transmitter to give it a spin, but that means we’ll have to find a new armband or other method of bringing the iPhone along on a run. Really, it was the iPod Nano’s size that made it ideal for this purpose, while the iPhone is a bit clunky here.

Our biggest complaint about the iPhone 3G S is battery life. Indeed, being attached to a 3G signal must burn energy like no one’s business, because we’re constantly running low. We’re starting to think that heavy use of the GPS is another contributing factor, but it’s hard to rule this out until we start using the Geocaching app in offline mode, when we’re not relying on the network to continuously retrieve information on nearby caches. For most days of use, our 2G iPhone was happy enough with a night-time charge while we were sleeping, and it would rarely be dead by the time we laid our head to rest. The iPhone 3G S, however, uses significantly more battery life just in standby mode, to the point where we’re actually considering turning it off when we’re at work and not using it. This despite Apple’s claim that the 3G S sports longer battery life the the 3G. No wonder so many of 3G-toting fools were turning 3G off for routine travel.

We were right about leaving our jailbroken 2G iPhone behind, however. SBSettings was an invaluable tool, and with the speed and extra RAM of the 3G S’ hardware, Backgrounder would be ever more useful now than it was before. These two apps alone would be killer additions to a future iPhone OS update, but as it’s unlikely we’ll ever see anything like them made official, we’re eagerly looking forward to the eventual iPhone 3G S jalbreak solution.

It looks like we can’t expect major improvements from year-to-year, but enough has happened over two years that we can expect to want another upgrade come 2011. That said, we can certainly see why some people are clamoring to get ahold of Apple’s latest and greatest phone, even if they did buy last year’s version. As far as a phone and ultra-compact web browser go, the 3G S’ specs didn’t wet our appetite all that much, but a number of lesser features added up in this case, putting our tech desire over the edge. Heck, if we didn’t already want to replace our Garmin 60CS and Optio S, maybe we would’ve held onto the 2G iPhone for another year, but in our case, consolidating three devices into one is more than worth it, especially since it’s a device always nearby.

With turn-by-turn GPS soon-to-be-realized, the next big trick will be identifying the best ways to mount the iPhone 3G S on our vehicles without spending an inordinate amount of money. Some thoughts:

1. While we already have a GPS in our Volkswagen R32, the GPS software (and interface) is simply miserable. So, we’d like to mount the iPhone in an easy-to-reach location. The trick here is figuring out wiring, With the 2G iPhone, we used the car’s integrated iPod interface, which tucked the iPhone away in the center console. The iPhone 3G/S runs at a different voltage, so the old charger won’t work. Audio alone isn’t an option given the battery life and we need to see the iPhone’s screen now, so we can either find an adapter/cable for the dock, else get a (likely cheaper) cigarette lighter adapter, and then run a second cable (for audio) to the glove box which contains an aux-in port for the stereo. This is a messier solution (since it requires two cables), but potentially frees up the console for our iPod Nano, which we can use for backup music (it’s not like the older Nano will have a decent resale rate these days anyway). We’ll have to check with other VW owners to see what their solutions will be.

2. Our BMW 1200GS motorcycle is currently fitted with a RAM and Touratech mount that holds our Garmin 60CS. The power adapter is hard-wired into the 1200GS’ system. We may try to avoid the headache of doing the same thing with the iPhone, and instead simply find an iPhone power cable with a socket adapter. The next step would be to either modify the RAM mount to somehow hold the iPhone (perhaps by attaching a cradle of some sort), else get a new mounting system entirely. Also, whatever we do, we nee to find a way to keep the iPhone dry, either by finding a water-proof mount, or ghetto-rigging a water-proof armband to attach to our mount. The final step will be to attach something to the index finger on our glove to work the touch-screen. Obviously, this motorcycle scenario will be the most difficult to deal with. Again, a motorcycle user group may be a good source of ideas.

3. With a bicycle coming our way soon, we’d like to find a mount that we can use with the iPhone here, too. If the mount/cradle for this can also be used in one of the aforementioned scenarios also, that would be fantastic, but we don’t have high hopes. Any bicycle mounts worth recommending?

Worth mentioning about the 3G S (and perhaps the iPhone 3.0 software in general) is that the extensibility of the iPhone is furthered. No longer do we own an iPhone simply because it’s a great smartphone, we now own an iPhone because it’s a solid GPS too (okay, so we’re jumping the gun a bit because great turn-by-turn apps are still weeks away). In other words, the iPhone 3G S is changing our daily habits compared to how we lived with the 2G iPhone, and that’s notable. Had we purchased the iPhone 3G last year, we wouldn’t have changed our habits in any significant way. The effect of the conglomeration of iPhone OS 3.0, and the new hardware in the 3G S, is what makes the latest iPhone a wonder-toy.

Similar Posts:

• iPhone 3G S not fantastic, but good enough for us. – Shortly after the iPhone 3G S was announced on Monday, the opinions of the masses leaked onto the bl…
• Conceptualizing an Apple sub-notebook: the Apple Annex. – When we commented on the Macbook Air, we were not pleased with the unit’s price, particularly as it …
• If you want an iPod Touch, get an iPhone. – When I recently argued that the iPhone is a better buy than the iPod Touch, even if one never uses t…
• The iPhone is cheap? – Since getting his hands on an iPhone, Michael of Apple Gazette has been running a column entitled “3…
• Automobile audio done right. – When the mp3 was created, it didn’t take long before people wanted a way to play these digital music…

Shortly after the iPhone 3G S was announced on Monday, the opinions of the masses leaked onto the blogosphere, and never were they more fierce than when it was revealed that most iPhone 3G owners would not be subject to the subsidized 3G S price should they want to upgrade. But do they even want to upgrade? Some, like Steve Gillmore, see the 3G S as appropriately innovative.

Apple’s rigorous march forward and its deep understanding of what the market will want next is not only keeping them ahead of the competition but building the markets they will own tomorrow.

We happen to disagree. Apple hasn’t identified what the market will want next, they’ve seen what the market already offered, then delivered it better than the competition. Much like Blizzard’s foray into MMOGs, Apple succeeded with the iPhone because of polish, not pure innovation. That’s why we were underwhelmed with the iPhone at launch. To reiterate, the only “killer features” the iPhone offered at launch was a branded iPod app and a web browser which properly rendered web sites. Even with the evolution of the iPhone’s firmware, upon the release of the iPhone 3G and “2.0″, Apple wasn’t really offering a revolutionary product, but again simply polished the features that other companies previously failed to deliver.

What’s amusing is that this round of iPhone revisions is little different from the evolution we saw last year, so it’s no wonder that folks like Chad Garrett won’t be upgrading from the iPhone 3G.

Beyond aesthetics, the iPhone simply does not do much beyond it’s little brother the iPhone 3G (after the 3.0 software update). What are we getting other then [sic] a little extra speed?

What Garrett seems to overlook is the fact that this minor speed boost is exactly what the 3G offered over the original iPhone. After all, original iPhone owners still got the 2.0 firmware upgrade, so all 3G buyers were getting was GPS and a “a little extra speed”. The GPS, in fact, was arguably negligible: no turn-by-turn directions, and somewhat redundant given the accuracy of cell-tower triangulation in densely-populated areas. Now, we’re getting enhanced GPS features (via the digital compass), voice commands, and a better camera.

Any of this sound similar? Yeah, all these features already exist on other phones. Apple is simply polishing them up once again and packaging them up in the iPhone format.

So why are we getting the 3G S?

Quite simply, because it’s time. We held out against the 3G because we didn’t find it to be a good upgrade, particularly when we saved money by keeping the original iPhone unlocked and on T-Mobile’s network. The initial draw of the GPS was because of the possibility of turn-by-turn directions, and now that this will be possible, we can finally replace our aging Garmin 60CS with a newer iPhone. With the option to get either either the iPhone 3G or iPhone 3G S (both of which require a 2-year contract for the subsidized price), we’re opting for the unit with more features, and the 3G S’ integrated digital compass duplicates the functionality of our Garmin unit, and will work great as a Geocaching device (particularly with the available geocaching app available in the AppStore).

The camera upgrades arguably match the specs of our digital camera (Pentax Optio S), which means that we can once again replace an aging device, thereby reducing our electronics clutter. Finally, better battery life and performance are nice additions, and for a $100 extra over the “new” $99 iPhone 3G, the 3G S makes perfect sense for us. That said, for current 3G owners, the upgrade to the 3G S may not be the smartest use of $200.

What we would have liked to see.

Why no video recording as a basic option under firmware 3.0? Jailbroken application CyCorder already runs on the original iPhone and the iPhone 3G, and offers up to 15 frames per second (FpS). While the 3G S offers 30 FpS, there’s no reason that previous iPhone revisions couldn’t offer video recording, albeit at lower frame rates. Why not give that option to existing iPhone owners? And for the 3G S, no HD video? Apple could have seriously attacked the mini HD camera market with this kind of feature, but instead we have a rather small 640×480 resolution. (Remember when that was normal?)

Why no better still camera? Three megapixels is nice, but with Sony Ericsson phones soon to offer 12 megapixels, the iPhone’s camera functionality is pathetic. There’s also no zoom (optical or otherwise), and no flash. Not even a micro-photography mode, despite the auto-focus. Who would deny that a flash disguised as the Apple logo would be pure awesome?

Why no bigger screen? The iPhone should be able to properly display video at the 16:9 aspect ratio. Making the screen slightly bigger would have no effect on existing iPhone applications, since applications could remain restricted to the existing size.

Conclusion.

In the end, we expect to see even more refinement in the iPhone platform next year, to include a better camera. But in the meantime, as owners of the original iPhone, the 3G S fits the bill as a reasonable upgrade. If you’re already a 3G owner, however, you’re much better off jailbreaking the phone and loading on the unsigned apps rather than picking up the 3G S. And that’s one thing we’ll definitely miss: Cydia and its contents. Here’s hoping that the iPhone Dev Team will come up with a solution.

Similar Posts:

• The Sidekick: too little, too late? – We loved our Sidekick when we got it, but there were definite shortcomings that made the iPhone the…
• iPhones are not being bricked. – It wasn’t that long ago that real “tech words” never entered Average Joe’s vernacular. These days, t…
• If you want an iPod Touch, get an iPhone. – When I recently argued that the iPhone is a better buy than the iPod Touch, even if one never uses t…
• Why the 3G iPhone is underwhelming. – As we expected, the 3G iPhone was released with much fanfare, but we’re not quite sure why. Sure, a …
• AT&T screwed up our iPhone upgrade eligibility. – While we may not think that the 4G iPhone is an enormous upgrade, it’s all about the cameras, and th…

We’ve complained about the Jawbone before, and really hoped that Aliph would fix a couple things with the Jawbone 2 before releasing “Prime”. We were even told by more than one person that Aliph was indeed looking at the fragile ear-loop stem issue, but apparently Aliph only wanted to put forth minimal effort, and this they did with the latest Jawbone re-issue. The iPhone Blog has a review of the Jawbone Prime online, and as usual, their review is abnormally high. (Seriously, guys, do you ever give poor reviews?

All in all, the Jawbone Prime looks just like the Jawbone 2, with some refinement in the audio quality (and noise cancellation). Beyond that, the device still doesn’t have a mini-USB port on it, and instead requires the use of a ridiculous, proprietary USB cable. Then there’s the infamous ear-loop issue that we already alluded to, in which the plastic “stem” of the Jawbone ear-loops is prone to failure because it’s just a piece of lightweight plastic. How hard is it to ship ear-loops with a metal stem alongside a product that already costs $120? Fancy acoustic filtering or not, the Jawbone fails in the most fundamental category for bluetooth headsets: the ability to stay on one’s frikken head without buying countless ear-loop replacements.

With iPhone OS 3.0 to be previewed in depth later today, with support for stereo bluetooth included, maybe Aliph’s failure is moot, though. Perhaps the market for one-ear bluetooth devices is finally over, and maybe Aliph will wake up from their drunken stupor and announce a stereo headset offering soon that isn’t physically a piece of junk. In the meantime, we’re still flying with an acoustically inferior, yet far more practical Motorola earpiece. Our Jawbone 2, meanwhile, is still ear-loop-less and collecting dust as a result.Similar Posts:

• The Aliph Jawbone’s critical failure. – Back in July, we bitched about our Motorola H700 bluetooth headset dying. So frustrated were we wit…
• It’s time for non-headset bluetooth iPhone accessories. – Now that iPhone OS 3.0 is out, with better support for bluetooth accessory access, it’s time we star…
• Top mendax.org posts from Jan, 2009. – Haven’t been regularly reading mendax.org? In case you missed them, here’s a quick digest of the top…
• The 2010 Toyota Prius IV. – The 2010 Toyota Prius IV isn’t the type of automobile that car aficionados lust after. Rather, it’s …
• Trucker wants me to commit suicide. – I woke up on an overcast Sunday morning, thinking everything was going to be just fine, because I ha…

A lot of people dislike AT&T. Granted, that number pales in comparison to the number of people who like AT&T, even if that relationship is entirely due to the iPhone’s embrace. It’s not as though most iPhone users love AT&T’s network, though, as AT&T has oft-been criticized for poor coverage areas and higher prices than competing carriers. In other words, AT&T’s growth is because of the iPhone, not because the iPhone is a bonus on top of some superior service. So it’s no surprise to hear that many iPhone users would gladly move to a different carrier if the iPhone were unlocked. But unlocking isn’t the only obstacle, because the iPhone’s hardware is built around GSM networks, not CDMA technology used by carriers like Verizon and Sprint. Even T-Mobile, which runs on GSM and can support EDGE, isn’t hardware compatible with the iPhone’s 3G implementation, meaning that unlocked 3G iPhones running on T-Mobile don’t get to run at the 3G speeds they’re otherwise capable of. And that’s sad, because it means consumers have little choice if they want to make the most of their cutting edge phones.

The iPhone’s exclusivity with AT&T is likely to continue for at least another year, whereupon some analysts believe that Apple may consider supporting other carriers. But again, this is no mere simple task, because Apple isn’t likely to suddenly spawn a CDMA iPhone even if AT&T were to screw up badly enough to lose Apple’s favor. Even Verizon agrees that Apple support of their services isn’t probable until 4G becomes widespread, because Verizon’s 3G offering is rooted in CDMA and EVDO, whereas their 4G standard will be LTE. Apple’s philosophy on the matter thus far has been simple: support the international cell-phone standard by going with GSM. It’s a one-phone-for-the-world philosophy, and one that works well for a company that tries to minimize product load-out options for the ease of the consumer. That’s not to say that Apple couldn’t further simplify load-out options for their various products, but to be fair, most variations in a given Apple product line are subtle, like for screen sizes or hard drive capacity. In a product aimed at simplicity, like the iPhone, further variance can be confusion-inspiring, even if the source of that confusion is a simple matter of what type of carrier the phone can run on. In other words, offering two seemingly identical products, each tied to a particular carrier, could undoubtedly cause backlash from consumers at the end of their cellular contracts (e.g. “If I bought an iPhone, why can’t I use it at the other carrier who also sells iPhones!?).

These rumours going around about Apple in talks with Verizon – they’re probably just rumours, much like talk about an upcoming Apple netbook or tablet. Realistically, if Apple is in talks with Verizon, they’re just as likely to be in talks with Sprint, and even more likely to be in talks with T-Mobile, which is the only other U.S. carrier to offer GSM. If Apple’s intent is to get people who hate AT&T to finally jump on the iPhone bandwagon, why not go with the one carrier who is already using GSM, and offers much better pricing than Verizon to boot? Heck, Apple would probably still make money by bringing back the 2G iPhone and selling it for use on T-Mobile: we already are.

Simply put, we’d have a far more credible rumour if it was said that Apple is in talks with T-Mobile. The only value-add Verizon has at this point is a more mature 3G network, but it’s not one Apple can easily adapt the iPhone to. Or, at least, not as easy as they could adapt the iPhone to T-Mobile’s 3G network. So where does this leave Verizon? Back to Verizon’s own statement about Apple’s interest likely related to 4G, and that means these purported talks, preliminary at best, are aimed at a public offering once LTE goes live. By then (2011?), Apple should be in a position to play all LTE providers against one another in oder to secure a sweet subscription-sharing deal. Whereas AT&T can now claim to be the only GSM carrier with a mature 3G network (T-Mobile’s is still not national), the LTE land-scape will be a different picture. As of right now, Verizon’s LTE plans appear ahead of AT&T’s schedule, but since a 4G-enabled iPhone isn’t in production yet, Apple has a number of options when the time comes:

One, Apple could stick with AT&T, offering an iPhone that works on EDGE, HSDPA, and LTE (i.e. adding LTE onto the current iPhone framework).

Two, if Verizon offered a good enough incentive to Apple and proved that their LTE network was capable of nation-wide use, Apple could offer the same phone to Verizon customers, with the only downside being that LTE dead-spots would mean no backup EDGE/3G service. The same thing applies for T-Mobile (but with backup EDGE and maybe 3G), and with Sprint (in the same situation as with Verizon).

The unlikely third option is if Apple decided to ditch AT&T for future iPhone revisions, in which case, they could conceive of a CDMA-based 4G iPhone for use on Verizon and maybe Sprint. The downside with this is that Apple would still need a separate iPhone hardware package for international customers, since everyone outside of the United States is still on GSM. (Think of GSM like the metric system of cell-technologies.) In other words, for simplicity of production (and customer adoption), it doesn’t make sense for Apple to duplicate the existing iPhone and simply swap out the GSM parts for CDMA parts. It’s far more likely, rather, that any talks Apple is in with non-AT&T carriers is to figure out where those carriers will be with their 4G network initiative by the time Apple’s iPhone exclusivity contract ends. If Apple doesn’t foresee a solid 4G roll-out by that time, Apple will very likely renew their contract with AT&T for a little while longer. Only when 4G looks like it will be widespread enough for significant use, will Apple re-evaluate their exclusivity agreements. Besides, by that time, Apple will be in a much better position to weigh exactly how big a threat the competition is, as the Palm Pre and Android should have been widely launched.

By that time, with the Pre’s exclusivity with Sprint ending, and Android moving across the carrier lines as well, it will be a natural move for Apple to follow, but with a product that, unlike Android phones, will have built a unified user-base familiar with exactly one hardware package, not multiple variants. If anything, that solidarity is what defines the iPhone: one phone to rule them all.

Update:Dilger’s take on the matter, over at Roughly Drafted, mirrors some of our own opinions. Choice quote mash-up:

What good is it to develop a secondary, parallel development of the iPhone to gain a standing in front of 80 million potential new customers when you lose your existing partner currently promoting the iPhone to 80 million existing customers as well as sucking the life from [the competition]? … It would be ridiculous for Apple to spend a year developing an EVDO mobile stack so that it could offer potential AT&T switchers a lazier alternative for another year before everyone began wanting a mobile device faster than EVDO or today’s UMTS can deliver.

If Apple maintains exclusivity with AT&T, non-AT&T carriers continue to lose business, effectively centralizing the iPhone’s network. With no carrier competition, all iPhone subscriptions funnel into the same resource pool, which will arguably be used to better AT&T’s network. This develops a baseline iPhone experience that defines what it means to own an iPhone.

Losing carrier exclusivity means that two different iPhone owners would have drastically different experiences because of the networks they’re on. Not to mention, the two networks will be poorer individually than if they were one. So the “one phone to rule them all” idea really carries over to the network as well. One iPhone. One network. One glorious user experience. At least in theory.Similar Posts:

• European law aims to propagate the iPhone culture. – After Apple’s lawyers presumably spent many nights awake looking for looholes, they finally gave in …
• What if Apple’s deal with AT&T is a sham? – When news first hit that Apple was making the iPhone a device to be exclusively used on AT&T’s shabb…
• Random thoughts on the iPhone. – After much line sitting, the iPhone has been loose in the streets for a whole weekend now, and awful…
• Apple and Cingular are an unholy marriage. – When two companies get together for exclusivity agreements, it takes freedom out of the consumer’s h…
• Why the 3G iPhone will be “meh” for unlockers. – Some people are wetting their pants over the prospect of a 3G iPhone coming out next month (or this …

There was almost no hesitation when we ditched our Danger Sidekick III for the iPhone. It’s not that the Sidekick II was vastly inferior, or that the iPhone was so revolutionary. Rather, it’s because we were never wholly vested in the Sidekick platform, because there was little that it offered that was inherently unique compared to Apple’s offering. In great part, this is because T-Mobile locked the Sidekick down, not only in terms of bluetooth functionality and the lack of MMS (sound familiar?), but because the Sidekick’s application store was practically empty of anything worthwhile. Sure, there was the occasional application of merit, but we’re talking a small handful of applications that were by no means phenomenal, and the difficulty in getting ahold of the SDK, and then managing to get an application into the Sidekick’s online store, pretty much dissuaded anyone from developing for the platform.

Apple managed to correct much of the problems the Sidekick faced with more polished applications, a great distribution model, and general availability of the SDK to consumers. The result is a very flourishing marketplace for iPhone applications, and combined with the iPhone’s hardware prowess, there are few limiting factors in the platform’s application growth (adult content not withstanding). Now that other viable competitors are slowly materializing (e.g. Google’s Android and Palm’s Pre), Apple’s polish will only be one factor in keeping customer’s glued to the platform. More specifically, it’s a user’s reliance on the AppStore to customize their iPhone experience that will determine how long they’ll stick with the system.

Apple has done a great job with its influencing of low-prices in the AppStore, with many useful applications even being free. Even $1 applications receive a lot of attention because of the impulse-buying effect – to most people, $1 is a negligible amount of money even during the recession. And with this impulse buying, even a handful of applications will increase a customer’s hesitancy to dump the iPhone for a competitor’s platform. After all, no matter how sexy the competition’s device may be, there’s that one guy who can’t go without his favorite iFart application in his pocket at all times. As the competition may not have the same extensibility as the iPhone because it’s application library will undoubtedly be smaller (and different), Apple’s most powerful weapon against attrition is what they don’t directly produce: AppStore apps.

Yet the interesting conundrum here is not the effect of proprietary iPhone applications, but rather applications that leverage the cloud. Take for example our recent adoption of Google’s applications; whereas before, one of the iPhone’s clear draws was its synchronization with iCal, we now have a far more flexible system utilizing Google Calendar, in that we can not only sync it with iCal, but make changes on any computer connected to the internet. In effect, the iPhone’s calendar application has become that much less useful, and so envisioning our switch to a new mobile handset has just become slightly more reasonable.

What we’ve seen of late is a rise in the popularity of cloud-based apps like Evernote, and there’s every reason to assume that these kinds of clients will find native ports on every major handheld platform over the next several months. And that poses a further threat to the iPhone’s attrition rate, because if users are prone to adopting technologies based in the cloud, instead of on traditional applications with direct one-to-one synchronization (e.g. using Evernote instead of Things), then there’s less and less of a reason to rely on the iPhone for accomplishing specific tasks. After all, if my calendar, e-mail client, to-do list, et al are all available on every device, with little (if any) changes between them, then only the core user experience will matter when we decide which device to use. And with that, we’re back where we were before the Sidekick, iPhone, and other smartphones – in a sea of basically similar devices, where core polish and price will ultimately matter.

In the meantime, we’re still vested in the iPhone because of the applications we love, but we’re very well aware that this connection with our iPhone is only as strong as the iPhone’s SDK and AppStore compared to those of other devices. Practically speaking, if the cloud becomes more attractive overall, only a great SDK and AppStore will keep the iPhone in the lead.

Similar Posts:

• Why Installer.app may not be dead. Yet. – The iPhone 3G has been out for one week now, and with it came the App Store, which allows iPhone use…
• Dictionary censoring: Apple’s gone too far. – Look, we love Apple’s products, particularly the iPhone and the great achievements that Apple has wr…
• Why Apple should embrace potty humour. – John Gruber reported earlier today that Apple denied listing an application on the iTunes AppStore t…
• Bring AppStore-banned apps to Cydia/Installer.app! – Per Nullriver’s own statement, Apple’s final judgement on NetShare is simple: perma-banned from the …
• iTablet AppStore has its downsides. – By now, the rumour-wagon has settled on the idea that Apple’s purported tablet device, to be unveile…