This guy, who used to be the editor for Windows magazine, is clearly not an Apple fan and totally biased. As such, he says a lot of idiotic things. That having been said, I do sort of agree that Apple blew its wad a bit early on this one. I understand the need for a pre-annouce of the iPhone, what with the FCC approval and all — but six month? They should have announced in in March or something.
001 // Brian Ford // 01.21.2007 // 10:33 PM
I’m not sure I agree that he could have waited. Demand for an announcement was -so- high that it would have been disastrous to their stock if they hadn’t unveiled a phone.
The author also makes the odd statement that they stole the thunder of the Apple TV — odd because the Apple TV is apparently selling like crazy even with the iPhone announcement.
Many of his points can be refuted just based on the knowledge that several devices (pure iPod, iPhone related, etc) are likely to fill in the gaps before the end of 2008. I think for his predictions to make sense, you have to assume that Apple only plans on utilizing the announced iPhone to grab that 1% of the market by the end of ‘08.
As for Cisco — Apple has lawyers that know far more about trademark law than the author of this piece. I suspect they know what they’re doing. Even as a layman — Cisco’s hold on the name seems tenuous, at best.
002 // Jeff Croft // 01.21.2007 // 10:43 PM
I would argue that the “demand” for an announcement of a phone was driven by the leaks out of Apple that a phone would be announced. In other words, if Apple had decided to wait a few months, that “demand” wouldn’t have existed (usual fanboy clamoring would have, but that’s difference, and not worth talking about).
Yeah? Where’d you hear that? Not disagreeing, I just haven’t head anything about Apple TV sales.
Right. But I still feel like six months is a heckua long time ahead to announce this phone. I think:
I agree.
Bottom line: the iPhone is going to sell like crazy, and this probably doesn’t hurt Apple too much. Still, I don’t understand why you’d want to put this much time between the announcement of a product and its availability, especially when said product is obviously going to be a Huge Freaking Deal™ in the media.
003 // Kyle // 01.21.2007 // 10:47 PM
Sounds like that guy could find a shoulder to cry on at Sprint.
004 // Brian // 01.22.2007 // 7:44 AM
These are all pretty good points I believe, but he also clearly stated the real reason they had to make the announcement. FCC approval for the phone. The Cisco naming this i don’t get, It will probably result in the iPhone becoming the Apple Phone whch is perfectly OK. I still agree with the assertation that the typical Apple strategy of not making a true announcement until the product is ready to ship would have been best, they miss out of 6 months of speculation and free PR, but it might also be indicitave of a bigger probelm at Apple. The may not have had anything else ready to announce. Clearly they have finally gotten out a making a product announcement for every incremental processor jump as they no longer are any different from the rest of the PC market. OSX is still a ways off from the next release. What else could the announce? A N router, Big News there. Apple finally joins the club with every other network vendor. No new software products. The could hardly show up a MacWorld and not make some announcement, could they? Can you imaging their stock valuation had they showed up and only announced the Apple TV and a N router.
005 // Jeff Croft // 01.22.2007 // 8:20 AM
Right, but Steve Jobs said (and everything I’ve read indicates) that this processes takes less than 90 days. So six months still seems like a long way out.
That was actually my first thought, too — but the rumors that iLife and iWork will be coming out in a couple of weeks and that Leopard is close to being ready (the latest word is that it will sip in the Spring, which is far earlier than most people expected) negate that, if they’re true.
Still, you may be right. Having nothing else really ready to announce could have definitely been the issue here. Who knows.
006 // Brian Ford // 01.22.2007 // 6:29 PM
A thought I actually read on Slashdot of all places:
The 6 months pre-announcement could be strategic. They may want people with only a few months left on a contract to not enter into a new one. Even people (like me) who have two year contracts are usually allowed to get a new phone at the good price with a year left on the contract. I might be more willing to wait out the two years (instead of tacking on another two) if there’s an iPhone waiting.
It would make sense to clue prospective buyers in early, so they can avoid buying a new phone and extending a contract — making them prospective buyers for a lot longer.
007 // Jeff Croft // 01.22.2007 // 7:39 PM
Interesting point, Brian. Never thought of that, but it makes some sense.