Wow, you're smart. I was just so confused about Apple's decisions. I could barely sleep.
Tell us more, oh wise sage of telephony...
Apple aims to sell to the majority 80% of people. These people do not need 3G - the current highese speed form of networking.
3G also burns up battery energy quickly - what the whiners don't tell you. 3G also requires more hardware. These problems would force the iPhone to be much thicker or larger. This would reduce its appeal to the majority 80% of people. Apple is trying to solve these problems first before it includes these features.
As a phone, the iPhone can be used practically anywhere in the world. Only a small fraction of phones are used to connect to the internet - thus 3G is not necessary for the vast majority of potential customers - who don't use smart phones. Thus the iPhone actually will be attractive to the vast majority of Apple's potential customers. I seriously doubt that most parents would pay the extra $40 a month to give their kids internet access on their cell phones. They already pay extra for text messaging, over their basic phone rates. Apple did a very smart move and made the right engineering compromises to come out with a spectacular cell phone plus iPod combination. This will sell like hotcakes.
80% of the worldwide mobile subscribers are in regions served by GSM/GPRS/EDGE.
The numbers for every other protocol are substantially lower (even CDMA).
By the time you look at EvDO, 1xRTT, UMTS, or any of the other score of 2.5G, 2.75G, 2.9G, 3G, or 3.5G technologies, you've got to pick and choose and drive up cost and size and weight and drive down battery life to serve a market only addressing relatively smaller segments of the overall market.
Better to bring GSM/EDGE to market, serve 80% of the worldwide market, validate the overall concept, and then diversify. Look at how Motorola launched the RAZR (which came out at $500 with a service contract/$800 without) and expect that Apple watched that carefully.
But know this, Apple won't go to market in Asia with GSM/EDGE. Because they wouldn't sell very many (if any) devices in China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan without 3G technologies. Which, of course, is why those markets are waiting until MacWorld 2008.
reinharden
Correct on all points. I'll add some more.
By doing it this way they are not only making the safer move while still in (relative) start-up mode, they are also building in future sales by in a way underdelivering from the start. When VW introduced the New Beetle it was available as a FWD hardtop with a 2.0 liter gas engine. By introducing in the base configuration year one, then periodically adding one feature at a time (Turbo engine, Syncro 4WD, Cabriolet, Turbo Cabriolet and so on) it kept sales figures higher, longer, providing a much better return on the company's development investment.
We will see the same thing with the iPhone, with the likely addition of:
3G prior to introduction in Asia (possibly even prior to Europe, EDGE is not big here)
Possible upgrade to 802.11n (I don't know enough about the size/weight/power/price issues to prognosticate accurately here)
Larger capacity Flash memory as price levels allow (watch for this to parallel the iPod Nano line initially.)
Unlocked versions, usable with any GSM provider.
Someone (on Pogue's blog, I think) linked to a technology report about Cingular and ATT's plans for their network. I can't find it now. As I understood it, Cingular is in the middle of upgrading their network speed and services, swapping out Cicso boxes for Lucent ones with more capabilities. It looked like they might be done by June, which would allow the iPhone to ship with faster data transmission and maybe some more services.
best gay websites best gay websites best gay websites // integrated insurance services integrated insurance services integrated insurance services
Stop sucking Jobs' dick, you moron. GSM only means slow speed and no internet / voice connection at the same time.
Commenting by HaloScan
