iPhone reaction: Press, analysts, competitors and bloggers | iLounge News


iPhone reaction: Press, analysts, competitors and bloggers

“Apple’s new iPhone could do to the cell phone market what the iPod did to the portable music player market: crush it pitilessly beneath the weight of its own superiority. This is unfortunate for anybody else who makes cell phones, but it’s good news for those of us who use them.”—Lev Grossman, Time

“At first blush, it’s the gadget-lover’s ‘genie in a bottle’ fantasy: get three wishes fulfilled in only one wish. But like a mischievous genie, Apple has left us wanting more: a wicked video iPod with trifling storage capacity, a super smartphone that will need to be shipped back for battery replacement, and an highly visual web device that may choke on data when used on Cingular’s current cell phone network. And then there are the prices, known and unknown. Perhaps by design, it will cause envy, yet immediately require successors.”—Jeremy Horwitz, iLounge

“At $499 and $599, it’s a pretty expensive deal. Steve is more focused on not cannibalizing iPod sales than on driving volume of phones. Those are not high-volume prices.”—Rob Glaser, CEO of Real Networks

“I don’t know a single person that likes the phone they have. Everyone feels like a victim of both their phone plan and their phone hardware. Cellphones seem to be one of those things that barely works given all the drawbacks. The iPhone isn’t just a new gadget. It looks like something that will transform the way we think about cellphones.”—Matt Haughey, A Whole Lotta Nothing

“From what Jobs showed Tuesday, the iPhone really does look to be five years ahead of what anyone else has got. Maybe longer. It’s taken rivals five years to catch up with the iPod, which now looks hopelessly outdated and crippled compared to the iPhone.”—Leander Kahney, Wired News

“There’s an interesting tradeoff presented by the iPhone. While the phone can do more, and it’s interface is fluid, in some ways it widens the gulf between human and computer. When you touch it it doesn’t touch you back.”—Jason Fried, 37signals

“This goes beyond smart phones and should be given its own category called ‘brilliant’ phones. Cell phones are on track to become the largest platform for digital music playback, and Apple needed to make this move to help defend their iPod franchise as well as extend it beyond a dedicated music environment.”—Tim Bajarin, Creative Strategies

“It’s not just candy. These are entirely useful, new ways to use your phone.”—Mike McGuire, Gartner

“This thing will go through the roof, exactly according to Apple’s master plan. Prepare for a replay of the iPod lifecycle: other cellphone companies will rush out phones that match the iPhone’s feature list, but will fail to appreciate the importance of elegant, effortless, magical-feeling software.”—David Pogue, New York Times

“We are focused on the ‘pro-sumer’ and business customer, where e-mail, Microsoft Outlook and easy text entry for messaging and Web navigation is required. A full QWERTY keyboard is essential, so you can compose and edit documents fast and round-trip them back to the office rather than trying to navigate a cursor up and down and sideways.”—Marlene Somsak, Palm spokeswoman

“What you cannot appreciate looking at iPhone photographs on your computer display is how amazing its screen is. 166 DPI is an amazing resolution—tiny, tiny text is amazingly legible. And the device itself is very thin. The battery policy, though, is exactly like that of other iPods: it’s sealed inside the case, and is not swappable.”—John Gruber, Daring Fireball

“Prospects for the new device are positive, but it is not a given that Apple can win against a slew of wireless providers, phone manufacturers, and Microsoft, all of whom are similarly motivated to raise their flag on the same territory.”—James L. McQuivey, Boston University professor

“At the risk of playing into the hype of the iPhone, seeing is believing with this device.”—Gene Munster, Piper Jaffray

“Apple’s bothersome tradition of non-user-servicable batteries continues. There’s no reason to do this, frankly, aside from the kind of implied ‘we’re aesthetic obsessives’ claim that Apple still gets away with.”—Rob Beschizza, Wired

“This product could not have been done two years ago and come to market the way that it has. Yes, I know other devices can do a lot of what the iPhone can do but that’s like saying there’s a lot of other music players out there as well.”—Michael Gartenberg, Jupiter Research

“It just confirms our message, and it’s good to have others preaching the same message. The best company will win in the end, so I think it’s good news for us. It’s not a threat, although of course it’s hard competition, but that usually makes you perform better yourself.”—Pekka Pohjakallio, VP of Nokia Nseries Computers

“OS X. On your phone. Damn.”—Merlin Mann, 43 Folders

“While its $499 and $599 price points appear high, they are highly functional devices and best-in-class. We would not be surprised to see simpler cell phones in the future at much more aggressive price points… Apple will likely follow its iPod strategy, which is to start out at the high-end and then trickle down to mid-range and low-end.”—Shaw Wu, American Technology Research

“I’ve already ordered two. I don’t know what the cost is and I don’t care. The higher it is the more I like it as a shareholder.”—Nick Kaiser, Saturna Capital

“Wireless is hard. Success in this industry has confounded other companies like Microsoft and even Motorola at times.”—Mike Abramsky, RBC Capital Markets

“The iPhone is a lot of things: A widescreen iPod, a smart phone and a mobile web browser. It also might be the death knell of the current iPod.”—Pete Mortensen, Wired News

Related Stories



That palm spokesman is an idiot: ‘… rather than trying to navigate a cursor up and down and sideways.’ does she not realise that’s it’s a multi-touch screen?

Posted by Tomo on January 10, 2007 at 11:11 AM (CST)


I think Palm, like they have been for the last 5 years, are still in denial about their own inadequacies.

Posted by Dan Woods on January 10, 2007 at 2:37 PM (CST)


After spending two days reading the enormous amount of buzz about the iPhone, not least of which on this page, I was most intrigued by David Pogue’s comparison with the iPod. The big difference, however, and it is a BIG difference, is the target market. The iPod was initially, and to some extent still is marketed to young people with limited disposable cash. In fact, I would argue that the success of the iPod was largely due to the arrival of the inexpensive Mini and then the even less expensive Shuffle. Moreover the iPod is a simple tool that anyone can use. By contrast, the iPhone is very expensive, and one assumes will remain that way for some time, with very limited storage space (i.e. for movies etc.). It is also designed for a person whose life is much more complicated, if you will, someone who needs to spend quality time conferencing by phone, checking emails, stock quotes (presumably Berskhire Hathaway) and the like. The bottom line: A beautiful machine most of us will not see for quite some time though.

Posted by paliowinner on January 10, 2007 at 2:46 PM (CST)


if u remenber, the 4G ipod with color screen and 60Gb was the same price (or more… i dont remember…) and sold a lot. that could mean that the iPhone will sell a lot too.

Posted by Leonardo Zingnao on January 10, 2007 at 3:19 PM (CST)


here in argentina a Samgun phone costs 400 dollars, and the sony walkman, costs 500, and they are a piece of crap. But people buy them. And we have a 3 to 1 conversion ratio. Is like if they cost 1500 dollars in USA. I’m sure they would sell anywhere.

Posted by kwanbis on January 10, 2007 at 3:40 PM (CST)


Has anyone actually sat down and done a point by point comparison of what this phone actually *does* that is useful for…wait for it…a phone?

Methinks the flash has dazzled many an eye.

Posted by stark23x on January 10, 2007 at 4:32 PM (CST)


Those are some very good comments. But I disagree with Shaw Wu and wouldn’t expect Apple to release phones with less features later on. Why compete with the low end? I think they are releasing a handheld Mac (Mac CE?) with a phone and this OS is the future of iPods. I think they will need to release handheld Macs without phones and hopefully serious storage (30-100 GB), probably this year. That’s what I will wait for.

Certainly the battery will be replaceable. My phone’s battery doesn’t last more than a year.

Posted by brted on January 10, 2007 at 4:49 PM (CST)


stark23x: someone has: Steve Jobs. He was right about the price of a smartphone being $299. And the price of a 4GB nano is $199. So, the price together? About 398 dollars.

Posted by anti-luddite on January 10, 2007 at 6:48 PM (CST)


Fi this thing marks the ‘death knell’ for the iPod, it also marks the end of any of my dollars flowing to Apple.

Posted by anon on January 10, 2007 at 7:00 PM (CST)


anti, that’s not an answer.  That’s fanboi nonsense.

I’m talking about actual usefulness, not flashy tradeshow presentation.

Posted by stark23x on January 10, 2007 at 10:09 PM (CST)

Subscribe to iLounge Weekly

Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter

iLounge is an independent resource for all things iPod, iPhone, iPad, and beyond.
iPod, iPhone, iPad, iTunes, Apple TV, Mac, and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc.
iLounge is © 2001 - 2018 iLounge, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy