vB Easy Archive - Will Apple pull a "Blackjack" on us?

Pages: 1

Will Apple pull a "Blackjack" on us?
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: toomer

All of the buzz about the 3G iPhone, has even got me wondering if it's actually going to come out this summer (see my link below for my original positions on this).

We all know that power management is paramount for Steve Jobs - he's mentioned it a number of times. So, if they're having to push the 3G iPhone out "a bit early" (as I'm thinking might be the case - so that they can hit 10m units by the end of the year as promised) ... I'm wondering, will Apple pull a "Blackjack" on us?

Specifically -- when the Samsung SGH-i600 was FCC approved (http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/05/...tphone-at-last/) we knew it to have 3G and WiFi on board.

But once it was eventually "picked up" by Cingular ... it became the SGH-i607, without WiFi -- http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/22/...-cingular-wild/.

Could Apple do the same here? If they haven't beaten the "power consumption/battery life" equation yet to Steve Jobs' satisfaction ... but are feeling pressured to get a 3G iPhone into market to hit their previously stated sales goals -- would the compromise be 3G only, no WiFi radio?

This would also help protect sales of the existing models that are still in the system, and would give them some points of differentiation between models.

If it was 3G only, no Wifi ... would you buy it?

Posted by: ruffdeezy

Apple would never do that. An existing model would not be stripped down as an update. I believe Apple will announce the 3G iPhone in june, and release it 6 months later.

Posted by: toomer

Quote:

Originally Posted by ruffdeezy

Apple would never do that. An existing model would not be stripped down as an update. I believe Apple will announce the 3G iPhone in june, and release it 6 months later.

LOL. They'd never do that, either. Osborne Effect.

Not to mention, that they really don't pre-announce anything. Not Macs, iPods, and not even the 16gb iPhone.

The MacWorld Jan 2007 "announcement" of the iPhone was a pre-emptive move from Apple's part ... to make sure people didn't "re-up" their existing contracts, beat the FCC announcement, and there was no "existing" sales of iPhones to worry about cannibalizing.

No, you'll get it about 4-5 weeks after we see something on the FCC site. But they still won't announce it until it's ready to drop (like, within a few days).

But I totally could see them saying "3G's fast enough, you don't need WiFi" ... which is effectively what Cingular did with the Blackjack I.

Posted by: bryanharig

I agree that Apple isnt going to remove a feature like wifi.

I doubt it for one major reason. It wouldnt actually save any battery life to remove wifi. The iPhone's wifi radio is quite miserly with power, even when compared to first and second generation 3g chipsets. See anandtech's comparison of the iphone on wifi to a BJ on 3g for battery life numbers.

It is one thing to do something unfriendly to the consumer when there is a benefit, but no one is going to piss people off for no reason.

Posted by: canadian studen

I also see them announcing it, and start selling it November.

Posted by: the.rebot

Quote:

Originally Posted by canadian studen

I also see them announcing it, and start selling it November.

X2, this is more like past events

Posted by: shaolinmonk

if the object is battery life.. why would taking wifi out be a factor? you would either be running 3g or wifi.. not both at the same time right??

the new phone will have it all probably..

quad+tri+wifi.. imo.. whether or not we get anything else... is unknown...

Posted by: THETRUTH#34

Quote:

Originally Posted by toomer

All of the buzz about the 3G iPhone, has even got me wondering if it's actually going to come out this summer (see my link below for my original positions on this).

We all know that power management is paramount for Steve Jobs - he's mentioned it a number of times. So, if they're having to push the 3G iPhone out "a bit early" (as I'm thinking might be the case - so that they can hit 10m units by the end of the year as promised) ... I'm wondering, will Apple pull a "Blackjack" on us?

Specifically -- when the Samsung SGH-i600 was FCC approved (http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/05/...tphone-at-last/) we knew it to have 3G and WiFi on board.

But once it was eventually "picked up" by Cingular ... it became the SGH-i607, without WiFi -- http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/22/...-cingular-wild/.

Could Apple do the same here? If they haven't beaten the "power consumption/battery life" equation yet to Steve Jobs' satisfaction ... but are feeling pressured to get a 3G iPhone into market to hit their previously stated sales goals -- would the compromise be 3G only, no WiFi radio?

This would also help protect sales of the existing models that are still in the system, and would give them some points of differentiation between models.

If it was 3G only, no Wifi ... would you buy it?

Lets say for all those waiting, I HOPE NOT

Posted by: THETRUTH#34

Quote:

Originally Posted by shaolinmonk

if the object is battery life.. why would taking wifi out be a factor? you would either be running 3g or wifi.. not both at the same time right??

the new phone will have it all probably..

quad+tri+wifi.. imo.. whether or not we get anything else... is unknown...

Maybe so iphone 3 can have 3g and wifi hahahaha.

Posted by: sicktoss

i think they are talking about a new iphone so they can release a new mac and have people forget about the iphone because they will be to busy buying a new mac computer instead and paying more money for it too

Posted by: toomer

Quote:

Originally Posted by bryanharig

I doubt it for one major reason. It wouldnt actually save any battery life to remove wifi. The iPhone's wifi radio is quite miserly with power, even when compared to first and second generation 3g chipsets. See anandtech's comparison of the iphone on wifi to a BJ on 3g for battery life numbers.

Yeah, I remember those numbers when the iPhone was first released - blew my mind that we can now do WiFi cheaper (electricity-wise) than EDGE/GPRS. This was definitely NOT the case a few years ago.

And I agree - I can't see Apple doing it. But then, we were all puzzled when the "Blackjack" finally hit, that WiFi had been removed from a form factor that obviously could have supported it...

I just think it fits with a strategy of a "family" of devices, each that meet specific segments in the market. Do you work in an office all day, and have WiFi coverage there and at home (like me)? iPhone 1 may work just fine for you. Are you a student, salesperson, or someone who is out and about for a large portion of your day? Maybe the 3G-only version makes sense. Who knows...

After all, we have the iPod (Classic). The Touch. The Nano. The Shuffle. All slight variations on one another, but aimed at specific needs.

Dunno, just a thought. But hey, it's 5:30 on a Friday, time to head off to the pub...

Posted by: JerryNY

Wifi gets better battery life than EDGE. EDGE gets better battery life than 3g. WiFi is less essential with 3g for network speeds but more essential wrt battery usage when available. Also with the iPod touch using wifi I don't see them leaving it off the iPhone.

Posted by: starry1

Quote:

Originally Posted by toomer

If it was 3G only, no Wifi ... would you buy it?

Probably not. I like having the option, besides, where I live there is no 3G {yet}. Don't know if we're going to get it either. Plus, if something happens where the network is down, then Wi-fi is definitely good to have available.

I would think ATT would want Wi-fi on there also-less people using their 3G network if people are using Wi-fi.

I can't see Apple going backwards and eliminating it and making their phone like everyone else's.

Posted by: Wide_opeN

I don't know how the masses feel but I'm 100% happy with the current model. If 3G were the only enhancement then I would stay with iPhone 1 until 09.

Posted by: TechGuy40

Never gonna happen. AT&T would have a freakin fit. The extra Data would cost them a fortune. You would see a plan increase for 3G iphones.

Posted by: tryn2getaclu

3G and no WiFi does not make much sense. Granted, the 3G network is growing but it is still FAR from sufficient. The newer model phone is likely to have improvements that the 1st gen model does not (hopefully) and Apple still wants to hit their 10 million units mark. There are many who live in areas that currently do not have 3G but are hopefull for it in the future and travel to areas that do have it. I, for one, would buy the newer 3G model if it has more features that I want even though I live in an Edge only area. 3G would be great for travel but I would mostly rely on the WiFi. If they drop the Wifi, people like me are likely to purchase phones from those upgrading. Sure, I'd have to sacrifice the newer features but I cannot sacrifice WiFi!

Posted by: Kevad007

It was AT&T who killed the WiFi in the Blackjack, Samsung has not been shy to complain. The official reason by AT&T was that the Blackjack battery drain was very fast, and having WiFi would only make it worse. Many do not fully accept that, as they rolled out the first 3G data plan with the Blackjack and 8525 calling it the PDA unlimited plan, you were told you must use this, and they priced it at $40 per month. If WiFi had been an option many could have opted to avoid data use until they had a WiFi connection at home, work or at hotspots. They needed the cash flow then to keep on building out the 3G system. Also, WiFi in the Blackjack could have resulted in many people not wanting or needing the iPhone, which at the time they killed the WiFi in September and October of 06, Cingular was making the deal with Apple. If AT&T money whores could force all iPhone2 phones to have only 3G and force buyers to buy a $40 dollar plan as their only option, they would. It is only the tech side saying hey, too much 3G is killing the system with overload and capcity issues. It sure would be best to keep the WiFi so as to not cause MORE capacity issues with 3G than they are alreadt surley going to have. Now they have the Starbucks hot spots along with McDonalds, so maybe they roll that into a plan for 5 bucks more. It will be Steve Jobs who saves the WiFi, and the greedy money takers who probably end up conceding to the techies that it must remain for the overall good of the system.

Posted by: Raw Tunes

Quote:

The official reason by AT&T was that the Blackjack battery drain was very fast, and having WiFi would only make it worse. Many do not fully accept that, as they rolled out the first 3G data plan with the Blackjack and 8525 calling it the PDA unlimited plan, you were told you must use this, and they priced it at $40 per month.

Battery life on the Blackjack w/o WiFi was TERRIBLE! We all know this. They tried to come back and correct it by shipping the bigger batteries in the newer boxes.

Posted by: Kevad007

Not only that but for a long time they shipped a second standard battery in the box due to the battery drain issues of the Blackjack with just 3G and later they let us keep both standards and issued a FREE higher capacity battery which was fatter and required a new back cover. The fact that there was found to be a high battery drain in the Blackjack does not fully or completely support why they took out WiFi, as Samsung will point out, a lot of the problem was in ATTs implementation of 3G at the time in late 2006 and early 2007, a point supported by the Blackjack's near identical cousin the i600 which HAS WIFI AND 3G, and performed better to a point, on European 3G despite IT HAVING WIFI TOO. No doubt that both ends could have used improvements, as Samsung ended up improving power performance and reception issues in the Blackjack II, increased the battery capacity which forced a new design and size, AND ATT has improved switching between 3G and Edge/G, improved tower equiptment and interaction with phones, as well as coverage issues learning from the problems uncovered by the early Blackjack experiences.

One reason Steve Jobs stated for not pushing out 3G in the first iPhone was because 3G was draining power faster than WiFi, so let's not get forget there were many sides to these issues, its not that 3G is all good and WiFi is all bad when it comes to power use, there are many factors and many feel that simply having faster data transfers in either 3G or WiFi simply uses more power but since you really dont use both at the same time its really not fair to say WiFi makes power drain worse in a phone. And thankfully that was then, and now the iPhone2 should benefit from the many lessons learned, but again, power drain in the Blackjack does not fully explain why they yanked WiFi.

Posted by: Quake97

Quote:

Originally Posted by canadian studen

I also see them announcing it, and start selling it November.

There is no chance in hell Apple would do this. If they announce a 2nd Gen iPhone, it would seriously cannibalize all of their current 1st Gen sales. Why would someone buy an iPhone when they knew the next generation was coming out in six months.

Some of you may remember this from the better times at Palm. They did a similar thing with one of their PDAs, I forget which one. They announced it three months before it was coming out and their sales plummeted. People were waiting for the new device.

Anyway, Apple will be releasing the next generation iPhone during an "event." This could be at WWDC in the summer or some impromptu event they schedule and send out invitations to the press.

Joe

Posted by: XanderMac

Itll be announced June 29th and firmware 2.0 will be released the same day.

The only way they would drop wifi is if 3g had 100% saturation. Edge in england is scattered so the subscribers get free wifi hotspot access to compensate. They would have to do the same thing here making wifi a necessity.

Posted by: Kevad007

I agree, 3G in the USA is far from 100% and therefore WiFI is still very useful and necessary for many. If they take out the WiFi in iPhone2, I ABSOLUTELY WILL NOT BUY IT PERIOD! I currently don't expect that they will take out the WiFi, but I think the original poster raised a valid concern as I don't trust AT&T to do anything to give the customer what they want, they work more on how to make a huge profit despite their customers wishes. In this case we would all think Steve Jobs and Apple would never agree to allow what happened to Samsung with the Blackjack, but I would agree, we won't know for sure until the day we know. And what scares me slightly about all this is Apple did put out a thin laptop with no DVD/CD, no ethernet port, no memory card slot and only 1 USB slot. And the original iPhone had no video etc......

Posted by: canadian studen

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quake97

Your 100% right, I actually thought about that after i posted, and thought that makes no sense what so ever, cause no one will buy the current model.