You're viewing an article in iPO's historic archive vault. Here, we've preserved the comments and how the site looked along with the article. Use this link to view the article on our current site: Apple's iPhone Doomed to Failure

News

Apple's iPhone Doomed to Failure

Apple's rumored cell phone isn't even a real product yet, but that's not stopping some pundits from declaring it a failure. Michael Kanellos writing for CNET News describes the iPhone as a smart phone similar to a BlackBerry, and states "it will largely fail."

Mr. Kanellos claims that the iPod is a one-shot wonder and that Apple can't produce a similar success story with other products. Most people, he says, assume an Apple phone will succeed because the iPod has done so well - a conclusion he thinks is flawed.

When the iPod was unveiled, it addressed design issues in the MP3 players of the time. It offered better storage, smaller size, and a good interface. Mr. Kanellos states "Unfortunately for Apple, problems like that don't exist in the handset business. Cell phones aren't clunky, inadequate devices. Instead, they are pretty good. Really good."

In essence, Apple is trying to improve on a market that doesn't need any improving.

But proclaiming an unannounced product dead on arrival may be jumping the gun just a bit. So far, there are only rumors and speculation pointing to an Apple-branded cell phone/iPod product. With Macworld Expo 2007 only a few weeks away, we'll have to wait and see what Apple surprises us with.

Thanks to MacDailyNews for the heads up.

26 comments from the community.

You can post your own below.

+ show options

Your current settings, click to change: Sort Oldest First, Show Guest Posts, Hide Community Stats

A guest said: (hide)

Yes, doomed to make a billion or two for Apple. Run for the hills!

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

I disagree the operating systems on cell phones are terrible. Nothing is intuitive. If they fix that alone it could be a success. Plus phones are terrible and allowing you to use what you have on your computer i.e. songs and pictures with your phone because the phone companies want you to buy from them the ringtones and pictures. If Apple gives us an easy way to make our own ringtones and own wallpapers for the phone it could be a sucess.

Quote this post ↓

disorderly said:

member since 07 Dec 2006 with 1 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

"Cell phones aren't clunky, inadequate devices."

Really? I see all sorts of compromises between features, ease of use, size, battery life... There's plenty of room for improvement. Whether Apple will be the ones to make a big leap is an open question. But I sure hope somebody does.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

The article includes this gem: "The iPod also conquered the problem of small screens and cheesy navigation. With its newfound popularity, the company was also able to get music publishers to agree to its terms." Cell phone interfaces today are much worse than mp3 players when the ipod was released. All the pundits had a field day that the ipod was too expensive and nothing new in the space, in fact. Also, when the iTunes Store was released, there was no Apple juggernaut.

A favorite quote by Steve Jobs: "Design is a funny word. Some people think design means how it looks. But, of course, if you dig deeper, it's really how it works. To design something really well, you have to 'get it.'"

Most people don't get it.

Quote this post ↓

jimothy said:

member since 04 Jun 2004 with 612 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

If it's going to be such a failure, then why has it already sold out?

http://www.crazyapplerumors.com/?p=734

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Wow. Cell phones don't need improving. Let's just give up and not move technology forward. Yes, cell phone interfaces are terrible, downright wretched things. Why is it that just scrolling through an address book is a gruelingly slow task on most phones. Apple could just add a click wheel and a responsive user interface that is not 3 steps behind me and I'm game. I love this attitude of, "They are doomed." People have no idea what's coming. There will be a market for people who are fed up with the complete lack of innovation and SPEED on ANY cell phone, just as more and more people are fed up with Windows. I don't have the patience for either.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

I agree with the above poster. Most people don't get it, regarding design. Similarly you either get Apple or you don't. Coming out front and declaring Apple a failure before a product is even announced, however, is a win-win as far as the author goes. It gets a provocative headline that in turn generates page views which begets avdertising dollars. No one's ever been fired for bashing Apple, however misguided their premise might be. And thus the John Dvorak's and Paul Thurott's and Rob Enderle's are born...

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

*sigh*

How about just making a phone that is...(wait for it) a phone?!? I hate these multi-purpose things, everything gets compromised and more difficult to use. If Apple is making a new phone, it will be amazing. I hope they resist the impulse to add "features" that will just compromise utility.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Existing cell phone user interface sucks.

If you are talking about cell phones being good from a feature-set perspective, then sure, they have a lot going for them. But, usability is in the toilet.

Go Apple.

Go iPhone!

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

CNET can't stand when Apple beats the PC world so they have to try and put out the FUD about something they have no clue about.

Nobody knows what features this iPhone will have so how can they claim it will be a failure? And if it's not a blackberry according to CNET then it has to be a failure. How many of us really use a blackberry? I don't, and wouldn't want to because they are so unreliable and cause more grief than there worth. The reason I know this is I had to support them at work, and that's why I wouldn't want to buy one for myself.

No if Apple is going to put out something it is going to be totally different than any phone out there and it will be as easy to use as an iPod. That's my prediction but like everyone else we will just have to wait and see.

Quote this post ↓

vasic said:

member since 09 Aug 2005 with 279 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Well, I for one hope this iPhone is in fact the ultimate multi-purpose device, with iTunes, iCal, Address Book, etc. It is such a royal hassle to have all these gadgets on me. I only have so many pockets, not to mention that when the summer comes, I have to either give up carrying my Palm and/or my iPod, or wear them geekilly on my belt. Once iPhone arrives, I'm getting rid of the iPod and Palm.

As for the doom-saying article, iPhone will succeed. Let me qualify; halo effect is slowly working with Macs. Now, these are $1000+ machines. That means, many people, who have $250 for an iPod, still won't pay $1300 for an iMac (refurbs are less, but no switcher knows about this). However, they WILL pay extra $50 for an iPod that's also an iPhone. Or, to put this differently, this iPhone will not be just another of the hundreds of phones offered by your cell carrier. It will be sold as an iPod that is also a phone (kind of like iPod with video). Whole world wants to have an iPod (unless they already have one, in which case, they want a newer model). If iPhone comes into the MP3 market, everybody will know about it and want it. In other words, while carriers will probably desperately want to sell it (perhaps even subsidise it with annual contracts), you'll be buying it in the stores where iPods are sold, next to the Nano, Shuffle and the rest. When every single teen in the world knows the difference between iPod with video and the Nano, they'll immediately know about the iPhone as soon a it's out. No Nokia, Motorola or Sony-Ericsson can ever hope to get that much mindshare.

If there is indeed an iPhone, it will sell. It will probably become another vehicle with strong halo, luring switchers over.

Quote this post ↓

mshoaf said:

member since 02 Dec 2002 with 112 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

disorderly wrote:
"Cell phones aren't clunky, inadequate devices."

Really? I see all sorts of compromises between features, ease of use, size, battery life... There's plenty of room for improvement. Whether Apple will be the ones to make a big leap is an open question. But I sure hope somebody does.

I agree fully. I can easily find something I absolutely hate about every mobile phone I've ever tried. (The providers are even worse than the devices.) IMO, there is much more room for improvement on mobile phones today than there was with digital music players the day before the iPod was introduced.

Honestly, I'll be among those VERY surprised if Apple does, in fact come out with a phone...

Quote this post ↓

Dirt Road said:

member since 24 Oct 2002 with 1239 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

If Kanellos really believes that smellphone interfaces are "...pretty good. Really good" then he's using something I've never seen before, and certainly nothing with a Motorola logo on it. Especially if the phone in question is multi-function. The phone part is simple enough to get right — that interface has had 100 years of use and and debugging — but if that's all that Apple is making, why bother? Any putative iPhone will have to be multi-function… the question is, what functions will it have?

I'd have to say it's pretty certain that the iPhone will have a good address book and scheduler, and will play well with the Address Book & iCal apps on OSX — these are functions that would be useful in a device you're carrying around with you all the time anyway — and will have Bluetooth capability since most Macs also have Bluetooth as standard equipment now. I don't know about built-in cameras… Moto sets the bar for sucky cameras, and it wouldn't be hard for Apple to beat them (it wouldn't be hard for Microsoft to beat them, for that matter). IMO, decent optics will beat a zillion megapixels, but that might be too expensive.

One thing that does work well with the smellphones I've used is the voice-dialing feature — at least in quiet conditions — push a button, say a name, and let the phone dial the number. Hey, phones don't have to have cameras, but they have to have audio input, right? What would be really trick, in my opinion, would be to ditch the camera and include a digital audio recorder for reminders or anything else — it would be a natural fit for a phone, and you could offload the audio into iTunes or even GarageBand for post-processing. Great audio input would probably be cheaper to build in than even Moto-level video, and would immediately set the iPhone apart from everything else out there.

Like the guest immediately above me says, though, we'll have to wait and see what Apple comes up with.

Quote this post ↓

Bosco said:

member since 03 Jun 2002 with 1002 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

The difference between MP3 players then and cell phones now is that few people had MP3 players then and nobody had an MP3 player contract. Seriously... with all the hype about this iPhone thing and lack of hype about the iTV, it would be very tempting to short AAPL before the end of the year and unload those positions right after MWSF. The stock price is being driven by analysts whispering rumors, the P/E is still way too high even for AAPL. They're never going to be able to meet these expectations which aren't tied one bit to sales.

Quote this post ↓

rezonate said:

member since 04 Feb 2005 with 741 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Bosco wrote:
The difference between MP3 players then and cell phones now is that few people had MP3 players then and nobody had an MP3 player contract.

True, which is why the next <I>wildly successful</i> version of mobile phone will seamlessly integrate contract telephony (if desired, with the carrier of your choice) with non-contract telephony (such as VoIP or iChat). I also agree with the comments about cell phone interfaces. I had a Treo 600, a RAZR, and now have a HTC Wizard (PocketPC-based). All are awful. You can get your task done, but you end up walking into buildings or driving off the road in the process. Hard. I want easy, and will pay extra for it from Apple if they ever think to release such a wildly intuitive device.

Quote this post ↓

Biff said:

member since 08 Apr 2004 with 1479 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

LOL. Been watching Mad Money again? Gee why would Apple's P/E be high? I wonder. Let's see... increasing computer market share, iPod is still going strong, Apple has yet to reveal all their cards for movie distribution, iTV creates whole new category of products, iPhone does the same... yeah you'd have to be crazy to expect revenue growth in 2007. Those are all rumors? Not going to happen? This is why investment professionals don't pay much attention to P/E. You have to understand the company you are investing in.

Cell phone contracts expire. And well... people have computers already but I don't think Apple is too upset with how their comptuer sales are doing.

Quote this post ↓

Dreadnought said:

member since 01 Jan 2005 with 162 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Must be the same guy at C|Net who predicted that the tablet PC, the Origami, and Zune would be revolutionary market leaders.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Yeah, and CNet also predicted that the iPod would be DOA when it was released.

Quote this post ↓

rpaege said:

member since 16 Dec 2005 with 96 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

What really, totally sucks with cell phones (besides the UI, as some might argue) is the combine created by the providers. Eliminate that anti-consumer and anti-competition problem and you will have a product that really sells, and especially if you can fix problems the pundits don't have enough creativity and imagination to see for themselves.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Who even reads CNET anymore? Their layout is retina-scarring, and their articles are mostly fluff devoid of any really useful info. There's so many better sites for the same info that its hard to list them all.

I guess CNET's desperate for hits or something. They don't like Apple, but can't stop talking about them because Apple means hits. Even when the articles about Apple blow. Its the ol' 'Dvorak method'.

Quote this post ↓

Bosco said:

member since 03 Jun 2002 with 1002 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

rpaege wrote:
What really, totally sucks with cell phones (besides the UI, as some might argue) is the combine created by the providers. Eliminate that anti-consumer and anti-competition problem and you will have a product that really sells, and especially if you can fix problems the pundits don't have enough creativity and imagination to see for themselves.

Yeah, so what do you think it would cost to put up a nationwide CDMA network that can match Sprint's? The rule for getting phones now is if you want coverage, go with Sprint. If you want good service, go with Verizon. If you want to bring your own phone, go with Cingular. Where does Apple fit into that as anything but a phone supplier? Except today, phone suppliers do things the carriers' way, not the other way around.

I'm not saying Apple wouldn't be a welcome player in the cell phone business. I'm just saying there's nothing they can do unless they build the phone and network from scratch. It's a worse business move that Microsoft with the Zune. There is so little infrastructure needed to support a Zune flop. Just a music store. For Apple to support an iPhone flop, it needs a whole nationwide network.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

This is one product that would do very well in Europe. If you'll forgive the criticism, the US is really backward on the whole provider mess.

Not that it's all good in Europe, mind. But better in just about every way.

In Belgium it's actually forbidden to sell a phone that's tied into a provider contract. You can switch provider whenever you like - not that they don't try to bind you with costly contract terms, mind.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

"I'm just saying there's nothing they can do unless they build the phone and network from scratch."

Interesting you should say that, since Apple has been reported to be looking for facilities from which to run their mobile phone network operations.

The launch of the iPhone will not be like the launch of the iMac - it's not a single product launch. It will be like the launch of iLife - "here's this great application called iWeb, and oh! lookeee here... there's this Internet service called .Mac that you can publish your blogs, photo albums, web essays, and all that neato stuff onto." I expect the iPhone launch will be something along the lines of: Jobs shows you the new iPhone product, complete with Apple logo in glowing hyper-intelligent-blue, then proceeds to call the iMac next to him to utilise some nifty feature (such as, for example, iChat AV), over the 3G network that Apple is partnered with.

You won't just be buying an iPhone, you'll be buying an iPlan over which you can make iChat video calls, download resources from the iTunes Music Store, and remotely interact with your machines at home (.Mac subscription extra).

Who's a big 3G provider in the USA? T-Mobile. Who has Apple been making really good friends with lately? T-Mobile.

There is no question in my mind that Jobs' next big announcement will be an Apple-designed device that connects to a 3G network and combines some features of iPod and mobile phone. It will do video calls and you will be able to interact with people using iChat AV on their desktop computers.

The only question in my mind is whether the iPhone connects to a special Apple plan on the T-Mobile network, or if T-Mobile will simply be providing infrastructure support for the Apple-branded 3G service.

Quote this post ↓

Rainy Day said:

member since 07 Jun 2005 with 607 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

guest (just above): Best analysis of the iPhone i’ve come across. Think you’re right across the board. T-Mobile is definitely in the cards somehow.

As for the original article, i think Kanellos is an M$ shill, a fool, or both.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

I will not think of this as a phone first, and most people I speak with about the "iPhone" say the same thing. It should be an iPod WITH phoning capabilities just like the video iPod is an iPod WITH video. It has to be seen as an entirely new product, an entirely new market.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Bosco wrote:
Yeah, so what do you think it would cost to put up a nationwide CDMA network that can match Sprint's? The rule for getting phones now is if you want coverage, go with Sprint. If you want good service, go with Verizon. If you want to bring your own phone, go with Cingular.

Actually Verizon's coverage is about as widespread as Sprint's, and quality/reliability is far better overall. Verizon still consistenty 'owns' in both Consumer Reports and JD Power surveys year after year.

Which is a pity, because if the other carriers could better compete with them, perhaps then Verizon's prices would come down a bit. Ah well. :\

Quote this post ↓

Post Your Comments

  Remember Me

Not a member? Register now. You can post comments without logging in, but they'll show up as a "guest" post.


Please enter the word exactly as you see it in the image above. Registered users aren't prompted for this. Having trouble reading the image get a new one.