CE-Oh no he didn't! Part XXIX - Apple sez free phones are worthless

Sure, Apple and Cisco have been exchanging kind (and not so kind) words of late, but a loose-tongued COO gave us just tidbit we needed to satisfactorily craft the 29th running of CE-Oh No He Didn't. It's no secret that Apple stands to profit mightily off its eventual iPhone sales, and it's also not too far fetched to start dreaming of 3G on the imminent next revision, but laying the smack down on free cellphones in order to bolster your own product is just asking for it. Sure enough, Apple's Chief Operating Officer Timothy Cook said yesterday at a conference in Las Vegas that "A lot of people pay zero for the cellphone," but rather than contemplating his next move, he carelessly blurted out the reason by stating "That's what it's worth," essentially punking users of the ever-basic free cellphone that saw no reason to spring for high-end hardware when initializing their contract. Apple is currently predicting that "around 10 million customers will pay at least $499 to buy an iPhone" because they feel the value is there, but apparently a low-end mobile isn't worth its weight in plastic. C'mon Mr. Cook, we've got no qualms with pricing your mobile as your company deems fit, but slamming the hammer on folks who just need a handset that calls Aunt Susie every now and then is just a bit harsh, no?

[Via Digg]

[ACT10Npack @ Mar 1st 2007 7:28PM]

Although free phone does the bear minimum, I don't think they are useless. A lot of people does not want to spend a lot of money on a phone that will only last for one year. I did spend $200 for a Dash but I wish I didn't. The only feature I use is the internet and there are limitation. I think a million people will pay $499 to $599 on an iPhone but I truly don't think 10 million will. A phone is a phone. It needs to do the that and a free phone does that just fine. If anything happens to it then you don't have to worry about all that money on the phone. Although the iphone has audio and video and internet, I truly think a iPod with touch and a cheap phone will be better off. Don't have to recharge the phone every night or have the charger with you if you use it too much.

[Harry @ Mar 2nd 2007 12:28PM]

Excuse me? I have a Motorola C261 I got for free. It's an attractive, super-slim, "candy bar" style phone with a VGA camera with 4X zoom, a LARGE full-color display, a built-in hands-free speaker, a web browser, pre-loaded ring tones, wallpaper, and games. It weighs just 3 oz.

It comes with nation-wide service with text messaging, free voicemail, free caller-id, and free call waiting. There's no long-distance charges within the Continental US, no roaming charges, no activation or cancellation fees, no contracts, and it costs as little as 10 cents a minute.

And with all of that I just want to call my wife at home every once in awhile. This is WAY MORE than I actually "need" in a phone, and it is FAR FAR FAR away from worthless.

http://www.tracfone-orders.com/direct/tr/itemdetl.jsp?prod=3381&tech=GSM4&techzip=23608


So have fun with your $500 phone. IMHO, a fool and his money soon part. There's a lot better things I can spend my $500 on.

[Brian @ Mar 1st 2007 6:35PM]

Well... he's right.

You know all those people that can't stop talking about how much their network sucks? Those are the [strike]idiots[/strike] people who took the free phone with their contract. I purchased Sprint's top of the line clam shell, the sph-a900. I get wonderful reception! People with their low end samsungs, sanyos, and ultra-low end nokias needn't change their carrier, but their cell phone, instead.

[Kev50027 @ Mar 1st 2007 6:44PM]

I payed $500 for my Nokia N80, and guess what, it can do more than an iPhone! Free phones do suck, but Apple really does deserve a LOT of dissing for the iPhone, iPod, iTunes, DRM, their obsession with white, and Steve Jobs' habit of wearing the tightest fitting jeans he can find. Sickening I tell you..

Honestly, anyone who buys an iPhone must be quite a dreamer, because it's just about useless compared to almost every other smartphone out there. Can't even run 3rd party software! That's like making a BMW M5 with no engine, it's beautiful, sure, but useless.

[Ray Valdez @ Mar 1st 2007 7:24PM]

what's wrong with men wearing tight fitting jeans?

i wear them all the time.

[Phillip Donley @ Mar 1st 2007 7:33PM]

I don't think that's the BEST analogy ever made. A BMW would just sit there if it didn't have an engine. I would compare it to a BMW M5 without power windows or no air conditioning. It's great, but it's missing some key features. The iPhone isn't designed for people that need a bunch of extra software. It's a phone and an iPOD with a web browser. It's not a POCKET PC. Perhaps one day it will become one, but until then, it's just an iPHONE, which is still very cool.

I mean... I think if apple let's everybody put apps into this thing, it starts to turn into a FRANKEN-PHONE, which is clunky, not sexy, and not what Apple intended on creating. Imagine if you could just swap out your BMW engine with a ford engine because it stopped working and you didn't feel like replacing it with BMW parts because they cost too much. Think if you want to put a different sized airfilter in your car because the one that fits the BMW M5 costs 10 times more because it only fits in a BMW M5. Nobody compains then. When BMW does it, they call it "WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU BUY A HIGH END VEHICLE". Here is your "HIGH END PHONE"

I think it would be nice to have a couple apps from MS OFFICE. I would also like to see a SLINGBOX interface, but I think Apple wants to sell these things knowing that nobody else had to create something to make it successful. Once that has happened they will open it up to other developers, just as they have with their operating system and their games for their iPOD (granted it's very limited right now).

I could see being upset with the iPHONE if it CLAIMED to use 3rd party apps and didn't, but I think they have been pretty clear.

Apple likes to be in the driver's seat. They also like to take their time. Nothing new here.

[michael @ Mar 1st 2007 6:55PM]

Boo apple. Just because you buy a cheap phone doesn't mean you're cheap. Sure, I'm not a big fan of cheap phones either, but you don't hear me picking on the poor or tasteless about their phone preferences. I bet he's drinking some lemonade and napping on an expensive hammock right now. Snob. Either way, I'm probaly not going to buy an iPhone because it's too expensive, overhyped, and just simply doesn't have any overall improvement than from any of the other current phones out here. Maybe I'm not one of your "ideal" customers.

[roe @ Mar 1st 2007 7:00PM]

Gosh I'm sick of Steve... does he not remeber his 1986-1996 slump?

His stuff is basically saying hey, if your rich, your smarter and better, so buy me. If your poor or someone who doesn't jerk off to tech news, then you are a lowlife. Hey, we'll even make it white for you and throw in a free cone hat!

This is why I hate Apple:
I got a free Nano from Pepsi, from a prize. It required and update and format at least weekly for the first 6 months. Then it would no longer allow new music. (During this time my friends 1yo ipod got a crashed hard drive, had to buy a new 400$ crapstick)...

So guess what? No new music... Format errors... Then finally it works again. However, now it no longer updates from USB, when it does... it holds a 2 hour playback charge.

Its expensive crap, even when free it wastes your time. I can put 30 songs on a 128mb creative labs 2000AD crapola in under 2 minutes... Ipod... maybe 5-10, and 100 sighs of "fark itunes is slow wtf doesn't this use the simple windows interface?"

[Mike @ Mar 1st 2007 7:08PM]

You know, the first iPod cost $500 and that was just a hard drive with a screen. That one seems to have worked out for Apple.

Fact is free phones do suck. In fact, 99.9% of cell phones in the US suck. Some look better or have more features than others, but in general none live up to the hype.

All these people claiming their phone does more than the iPhone...if you're happy, fine but realize there's a difference between doing something and doing something well with ease and style.

[Reg Muffet @ Mar 1st 2007 7:09PM]

I think we should start a new series:

Engadget-oh-sure-we-take-things-out-of-context-but-they're-funny!

Part MMXMCVIII. Episode II.

;)

[Twist @ Mar 1st 2007 7:10PM]

The guy has a point. The first cellphone I had was a free one and it was a major piece of crap. I paid $20 for the one I currently use and while it is better than that first free one I think it was overpriced by about $30 (not a typo). The iPhone looks really cool and there is a major geek-lust factor that I feel for it but I won't get one. All I really need from a phone is calls and voicemail so the iPhone is overpriced overkill.

[what @ Mar 1st 2007 7:12PM]

Free phones don't always suck... you could have "bought" a Blackjack, the (arguably) best Windows Mobile Smartphone from amazon last month for free.

[MacVicta @ Mar 1st 2007 7:31PM]

"Free phones don't always suck..."

Tim Cook didn't say they suck, he called them worthless. It is an opinionated term much like "better." What you value may not be the same things he or other Apple employees feel are of worth.

Handsets that are subsidized come at the expense of being under carrier control. Perhaps the iPhone wouldn't have turned out as Apple wanted should it end up with a $49 sale price on Amazon.com (like, for instance, it being used with Cingular's crappy music service instead of iTunes?).

That's a different debate, however. Right now Tim Cook's statement was taken out of context. Let's look at the full section from the Bloomberg article.

"A lot of people pay zero for the cell phone. Guess why? That's what it's worth," Apple Chief Operating Officer Timothy Cook said yesterday at a conference in Las Vegas. Some wireless providers win customers by offering phones that lack the latest features free with service contracts.

The iPhone, scheduled to ship in June in the U.S., combines Apple's best-selling iPod music and video player with a mobile phone that offers Internet and e-mail access. Chief Executive Officer Steve Jobs said in January that Apple expects the iPhone to capture 1 percent of mobile phone sales, which may total 1 billion devices in 2008.

"This will be a big piece of the Apple story for years to come," Cook told attendees at the Goldman Sachs Group Inc. technology conference. "If we offer something that has tremendous value, that is sort of this thing people didn't have in their consciousness -- it was not imaginable -- then I think there's a whole bunch of people that will pay $499, $599."

When asked how the Cupertino, California-based company estimated the market of opportunity for the iPhone, Cook said Apple rejected traditional approaches that call for comparing the product to devices sold in a similar price range. Apple plans to offer two iPhone models priced at $499 and $599.

"That kind of analysis doesn't make really great products," Cook said. "The iPod would not have been brought to market if we would have looked at it that way -- how many $399 music players were being sold at that time?"

[nickcalderon @ Mar 1st 2007 7:16PM]

what a bunch of consumer advocates. free phones are fine , it gets the job done and thats what counts. not everyone needs a phone that will be their best friend, yes, some people still rely on human interaction to feel complete. like getting laid, their is a good one, can your smart phone do that for you?

and to the second post, yes networks overhaul their networks and provide poor service to their customers. if you haven't noticed, we do not have many choices on phone services. they are called monopolies.

i think it's time to wake up and look around, apple phone, pineapple phone, who cares?

[A-ron @ Mar 1st 2007 7:36PM]

In the gamut of phones from free to 800 bucks, a free one is going to be of lower quality and overall functionality than one that someone actually pays for. This is a simple conclusion of logic. I will concede that a carrier will often discount a phone with rebates and the like when the "Gee, it's new and cool" factor wears off to keep units moving. However, by the time they've done this, there are invariably more capable units arriving for the same initial price as the now old skool, discounted phone.

And you may want to revisit the dictionary to take a look at the definition of a monopoly. Mono = one. So if Cingular were the only carrier in the country, THAT would be a monopoly. One cannot have plural monopolies in the same industry.

[Mario Mejia @ Mar 1st 2007 7:16PM]

A phone that may have cost 100's at launch will often be free at the end of its run, obviously Apple is too new to the phone industry to realize this. Eventually the iPhone will be $50... actually probably not.

Case and point.
Someone buys... let's say the RAZR at launch $200.
Someone a year later buys the same phone $0.

They are both walking down the same street on the phone, same reception, same everything. Does one phone suck more than the other?

No not really. People who get "free" phones (which arent really free bc you end up paying with your monthly contract payments) get good phones, they just choose not to get the latest and greatest.

So basically what Apple is saying is that people with free phones suck (not the phones themselves) because they choose not to get the latest and greatest.

[michael @ Mar 1st 2007 7:21PM]

You might be right about one thing (although I seriously doubt it) but those get-a-mac ads really do make fun of PC users. All I ever hear they say is how bad a PC is and how stupid Vista is, yet the only thing I hear they say for their mac is that "it's more fun" watch movies, listen to music, yada-yada, just things that I can do without a mac. They're not doing such a hot job of promoting their computers, if they consider it just a small step above PC's.

[bgdc @ Mar 1st 2007 7:26PM]

Apple's tiny HD on the iPhone and its lack of 3G makes me wonder who this device is geared toward. Put a 16 GB SSD in the phone and you have something solves two issues - carrying a cell phone and ipod. Add GPS sirf star III chip and now it solves 3 issues and allows Cingular to squeeze $10 more per month from customers.

At this point I'm still stuck lugging my ipod on trips, along with my cell phone. Make the SSD big enough on the iPhone and add 3g/gps, then you've got an item worth $500.

[chaser24 @ Mar 1st 2007 7:28PM]

for those 10 million people willing to buy an iPhone for $400-500, i have a great piece of land that i would love to sale you for the same price.

i think their ego has got to them and apple has lost touch with the average consumer. i can't believe i said it, but it is becoming increasingly apparent to me.

[TheBugMan @ Mar 2nd 2007 6:51AM]

Free phones don't suck!
All my cells were free and all great. The phone I'm using now is the Sony Ericsson W810i... FREE!
I'll get the iPhone free in two years if they build a few more features in it.

[Kev50027 @ Mar 1st 2007 8:34PM]

You make a valid point, however I still love my Symbian phone, and it suits my needs perfectly.

My favorite thing about it is that I can TOTALLY change the OS to suit my needs. I can change every little tiny part of the OS to just the way I like it. Also, there are thousands of amazing themes out there. Right now, my Nokia N80 looks exactly like it's running Vista, with see-through Aero effects and everything. I used to like WinMo, but in comparison with Symbian it just sucks.

I honestly don't see the iPhone selling more than a couple hundred thousand before people find out it's not what they expect at all. Texting is like trying to play a video game upside down with your pinky toes, and that screen will get so scratched up within the first minute that within a week you won't even be able to see what the heck you're touching. Touch screens on phones have never worked well, even with a stylus. It's more fit for a PDA, and the iPhone isn't that either.

In all respects, the iPhone is a BASIC phone for people who want to look cool and not make any calls/texts whatsoever.

[BloodFalcon @ Mar 1st 2007 7:35PM]

For Apple to claim that "free phones suck" - they are only showing that they are an elitist bunch of scumbags who don't respect or understand their consumer base who doesn't neccessarily have the money to "buy a new Ipod every year" like Jobs claimed they should have.

Apple is looking for $ and doesn't respect its consumer base. That is why I hate them with a passion and will NEVER patronize their business - furthermore suggesting other people interested in electronic products NEVER buy their products to.
A BOYCOTT.

Though I would never buy an APPLE product of any kind - but I must admit the Iphone did "peak" my interest slightly when I heard about what it could do. Naturally however, Other companys are gonna come out with a product similar to the Iphone by the time it comes out - thus its gonna be "old" once its released. The only thing that will make it famous is the cult fanaticism behind Apple products.

I think Apple should continue where Motorola RAZR V3X left off and make the iphone VIDEO CHAT CAPABLE. If the Iphone had video chat, you could ask for $700 for it and GET IT EASILY. These "Fashion trendsetters" really are THAT dumb to buy them in masses.

[Luigi @ Mar 1st 2007 8:25PM]

I am a first time Mac user, and love it.

As the Macbook was more expensive, I have nothing but good to say about it. And, when it the logic board broke, Apple upgraded the processor, ram, and dvd burner, as well as gave me a black model for no charge. Thats 500$ in free upgrades.

Thats why I love them as a company.

[felonious monk @ Mar 1st 2007 7:37PM]

What's the big deal here?

Have you used a free phone? they are cheap and basic... which is exactly why their owners would never buy an iPhone, a RAZR or even a $50 phone.

The guy isn't stupid. He knows his comment won't insense the intended targe for the iPhone; just bloggers with nothing better to do than make big hoo-hah out of nothing.

[Manuel @ Mar 1st 2007 7:38PM]

Consumerism, you are what you wear.

[tacos @ Mar 1st 2007 7:38PM]

I have a really cheap phone that gets good reception, and does a fine job for what I want it to do: just make dang phone calls. I don't need it to browse the web, play music, masturbate the dog, etc. Maybe I don't want to play lots of money for a phone that does things I never will use. Sure it's cool, but I could spend my money on something I'd actually get use out of. And for the record, all of the expensive phones I've had generally did worse reception wise than the el-cheapo nokia's I had.

[jorge @ Mar 1st 2007 7:41PM]

Let's sue them. Everyone else is doing it.

[cameron @ Mar 1st 2007 7:43PM]

Oh come on Engadget, does this really deserve to be a "CE-Oh no he didn't!"? The point's quite valid--I can't count the number of times that I've seen an offer for a cell phone on Amazon that had a negative price after the rebate (so I'd be paid to "buy" the phone"). The point is that quality has value, and the message manufacturers send to me when they allow their phone to be priced at below $0 is that that is what the phone is worth.

[Travis @ Mar 1st 2007 7:51PM]

All of you criticizing Apple and Tim Cook are morons. Listen to what he fucking said and then maybe you can comment. And engadget, great job taking this completely out of context! You people should really stop relying on engadget because they're obviously doing a terrible job screening for shitty articles like this one. Cook was simply comparing the VALUE (not cost) of the iPhone to the other phones out there, many of which are gotten for free under contract. He says people (ALL types of people, NOT cheap people/poor people/etc) pay zero for cell phones that are worth zero. The point he's trying to make is that people get what they pay for. His argument is that many people are going to realize the value of the iPhone, and when they do, they will shell out the 499/599 for it and they'll get what they paid for.


"And so, today in the cell phone industry, a lot of people pay zero for the cell phone. Guess why? That's what's it worth! And so, if we offer something that has tremendous value, that is sort of this thing that people didn't have in their consciousness -- it was not imaginable -- then I think there are a whole bunch of people who will pay $499 or $599. And our target is clearly to get 10 million. And I would guess some of those people, and there are probably some in the audience, that are today paying zero because it's worth zero or going to pay a bit more because it's worth it." -Tim Cook

[CzarCruise @ Mar 1st 2007 8:07PM]

Um...I have to disagree with the free phones being crappy. My first phone ever, a Nokia classic Brick phone, lasted me the longest out of any phone i've had, 4 years, and it got great reception and did what it needed to do, with the added bonus that if I threw it at a wall, it would still work. I haven't had a free phone for quite some time..(since I purchased my first Razr and then a day or two later it went to $0 and I got shafted) but the phones I have paid for have had more features, but are also much more prone to breaking. People seem to be forgetting that a cell phone, is a phone, and that its main job is supposed to act as one.

[jbelkin @ Mar 1st 2007 8:24PM]

What's he also saying is the pricing scheme essentially is telling consumers that if you pay more than $49 for a phone, you are a sucker - looka t the pricing of a RAZR. A Year ago, it's "value" both real and perceived was that it was a $250+ phone based on ebay costs for an unlocked one and the price of about $200 plus contract for a locked one - now, one year later, what has the phone companies and Moto allowed that branding and perceived value to slide towards?

ZERO.

Now, if they're not paying you $75 for the phone, you are a sucker. This is a stupid way to do business for a company - as a consumer, it also cheapens what you bought 18 months ago for $300 dollars!

Look at an ipod - you could have a 2-3 year old one and it's still worth more than your RAZR that's 1 day old ... part of buying something is its retained value. That's one reason people prefer Honda's to Kia's ...

As for the iphone - is it perfect, no and yes a lot of its features is already offered but we've already seen and rejected the UI from Moto, nokia, Samsung, LG, etc ... now, we can see if Apple can deliver a smartphone that is smarter than just imprinting the word SMART ...

As for third party apps - there is a REASON why those other bad UI phones needs more and better apps of what should have been delivered in the first place. By the time you add and buy a replacement note taking software, calendar, mail, etc, etc ... why not just buy an iphone that already has those world class apps?

This is the mentality of Pc users. Saving money by buying a cheap machine but then spending 3 times the amount to get it up to speed and functioning or spend 50% at once, get an Apple product and be ready to go in minutes. If you have the free time and enjoy buying lots of components to get working - that's great. Some people just prefer a working Ferrari versus a kit car.

[August @ Mar 1st 2007 10:02PM]

I think this kid just likened an apple to a Ferrari and a PC to a "kit car".

Mmmmk.

Configure a PC at Falcon NW or Voodoo.

I got your "kit car" right here you fruit-loving mindless hipster piece of shit.

[Alber1690 @ Mar 1st 2007 8:25PM]

Some of the best stuff in the world is free...I don't think Apple should change that. Obviously hardware is a little different, but offending the free-cell phone user is not a very good move.

[TechGuy @ Mar 1st 2007 8:28PM]

I disagree completly against the argument that a free phone has no value, that it is only an extension of the service.

This is only true because carriers lock down phones then restrict where you take them.

It would be like in the old days if you got a free phone with long distance service. If an ATT phone couldn't be used with sprint then it would infact be worthless.

It is the carriers not the phones them remove the "worth" or value of the phone.

Truly the Iphone is worthless to me. I will not switch carriers even for a FREE iPhone. Since the iPhone can't work with the service I choose it becomes a VERY expensive walkman/PDA.

[Paulypies @ Mar 1st 2007 8:32PM]

Classic Apple BS. In the UK you can get pretty much any phone you want for free on release from any phone store. My friend just got herself a Moto KRZR K1 for free, i got my Sony Ericsson K800i on launch about 8 months ago for ooh... free. and both phones can do plenty that the iPhone can't and many things better than it will when it does appear. Also comin late to the game and talkin trash about others isn't v cool

[kaushalsampat @ Mar 1st 2007 8:36PM]

If I buy a BMW M5, I'm in the drivers seat. If I buy a $500 phone I expect the same. Apple and BMW both make beautiful products. But BMW allows for third party items. BMW doesn't tell me what is and isn't allowed in my vehicle. I can sip third party coffee (encouraged by cup holders), listen to my 3rd party mp3 player (ipod integration), talk on my third party bluetooth headset, and store anything from golf clubs to dead bodies in the trunk.....After I've bought the car BMW doesn't care. Please Apple, ad some junk to your trunk (more storage)and let me decide how to use it.

[Phillip Donley @ Mar 1st 2007 9:07PM]

Once again... The iPhone has never claimed to be a POCKET PC. It is a phone, iPOD, Web Browser, nothing more nothing less. It does everything it has claimed. As for the BMW analogy, being able to drive, allowing others to sit in the car, putting coffee in the cup holder are functions that any car can do. Do you know a car that doesn't? It it didn't do these things, it wouldn't be a car, let alone a BMW. The iPHONE is everything it claims to be. When (IF) you buy it, you will be able to "drive" your iPHONE anywhere you want. I don't complain that my BMW doesn't drive me to the moon because they never said it would. IT WOULD BE A GREAT FEATURE THOUGH!

If they said the iPHONE was a MAC MINI pressed into a phone then I would be complaining (yes, I know it runs a watered down version of OSX). It's gonna be great for some people. Others will pass. You can't deny how slick the device appears to be (at least what they have shown us).

PLUS... Apple is so secretive about everything. I wouldn't doubt if they have been having private meetings with companies that "have something to offer".

I would like to see some more features, but I can wait until everything I want is available. My first iPOD was the 60GB Video iPOD. I'm very pleased with it. I can't wait to see what a few years of development does to iPHONE. One thing for certain... it's gonna be cool.

[Jamar @ Mar 1st 2007 11:11PM]

(reply to kaushalsampat)And yet you can't choose where the driver's seat goes (I want the wheel on the right side of the car even though I'm in the States). Like on the iPhone- can't type in landscape mode (as far as I've seen).

[js @ Mar 1st 2007 8:49PM]

Apple is right. Apple is always right.

Apple FTW!

[Adrian Williams @ Mar 1st 2007 8:50PM]

Some people dont want all these fancy features on phone they just want to make a farking call on it thats it

[vader @ Mar 1st 2007 9:14PM]

Bring back the mid 80s early 90s of Apple's Yuppie years. Yes the days when poor students like myself looking to buy and Mac to replace my first computer (Apple II) could not afford one, because it was priced and marketed to the rich Yuppie crowd. So I bought my first PC and it has been a great love story.

I sense deja vu for apple. Things are always cycle in life.

[Dave95 @ Mar 1st 2007 10:15PM]

This is hardly a CE-Oh no he didn't! He is correct! I just signed up with a new phone company that offered me a free phone. After researching a little on these free phones, I decided to spend the extra hard earned $$ and buy a better phone instead.

[Deezee @ Mar 1st 2007 10:21PM]

Elitism from an Apple employee?!!!!! I dont believe it. He must have been miss quoted somehow.

[perpetualtranze @ Mar 1st 2007 10:47PM]

anyone who pays that much for an iphone aka "piece of crap" should be flogged publicly in the street. wayy too much for a cellphone, why not just buy a low- end laptop or something that will actually be useful.

[Firebird @ Mar 1st 2007 11:31PM]

All you people are really failing to realize something here. No one is going to buy the iPhone for the fucking features. Most high end phones arnt sold because of their features. They are status symbols. Hey, look at me, I've got a phone with a faster internet connection and nearly the processing power of your home computer. It reflects the inner successful business man I hope other people will see me as one day. Hey look at me, my phone is so thin they call it a Razor, except motorola doesnt really like vowels much. Hey look, my phone is called a Sidekick! It has the internets, and a keyboard! It is also huge, and flips the screen out, so that it catches other people's attention on the subway and makes me feel that much better about myself! The iPhone will just be another trendy little (ok, big) fashion phone. It doesn't matter what the fuck it can or cannot do, as long as it's pretty, does something gimicky that'll make people go oooh, ah, (yea i'm talking about the touch screen.) and plays a little music like we expect from an iPod.

[nikster @ Mar 1st 2007 11:51PM]

uh, maybe he shoulda pointed out that there is no such thing as a free phone. just because you pay for it over a 2 year contract doesn't mean it's free?!

that said, $0-with-contract Nokias used to be very good back in the days. cheap & no features, but did the job and indestructible to boot.

[Nat @ Mar 2nd 2007 12:30AM]

Wow guys, I use a free phone every day and i get far better reception than my good freind who uses a $400 phone. Sure it was free, but it has bluetooth, a decent camera, great reception and syncs all of my contacts and calender entries flawlessly. why would i pay more?

the phone is the nokia 6102i.

[Telecom Freak @ Mar 2nd 2007 12:31AM]

$400 for a POS is $400 down the drain. (Sorry Jobs, I won't be taking a non-cisco iPhone for $400_.

I love all things telephony. VOIP is my friend and I have a personal VOIP server I maintain just for my use and have good cell service from Cingular even.

I got a free Razr with my Cingular contract, I use my 3 year old Nokia that I bought that works better, the free Razr really does suck, but it was free.

The iPhone really is over-hyped, and always will be. The next phone I BUY will have the functionality of a blackberry (PIM data sync over the network), the ability to use VOIP (SIP, not some proprietary Cisco sccp crud), Bluetooth, and will be 3G capable. It also will run my current Pocket PC apps (that is why I don't own a blackberry and despise palm, Windows Mobile has better apps)

Gupp Technologies' Linux-powered Phreedom ( http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/28/all-hail-gupp-technologies-linux-powered-phreedom ) will be better than anything Apple could ever dream of.

Apple should stink with their stinkin' iMac (although I won't buy one) and get a bit more real with their pricing.

If I wanted an Ipod with a telephone, this would be a temptation, but since I dislike the iPod, then I have no need for the iPod phone.

[dagamer34 @ Mar 2nd 2007 12:34AM]

This is the same kind of argument that Sony keeps making with the PS3; and with the same price points too!

[PixelsGold @ Mar 2nd 2007 12:35AM]

Picking on a common marketing practice of giving something away for free to sell something else, is pretty weak, considering giving away the horse to sell the cart advertising has been around for a long time. I'm sure many of you have seen those banner adverts and e-mails, offering a free iPhone if you complete a few offers. No product is immune to these types of advertising strategies and to think the apple iphone is above other products only makes it that much more open to scrupulation, and I think the "closed platform" approach is going to make this product fizzle past it's initial buzz.

PixelsGold

http://www.pixelsgold.com/