Well, Apple and Fake Steve Jobs (along with the real Steve Jobs, obviously) can breathe a little easier now that the sultan of consumer tech reporters, the WSJ’s Walt Mossberg, has weighed in on the iPhone and found the hotly awaited device to be a winner. (The review is also posted without a firewall on the AllThingsD blog here.)
Our verdict is that, despite some flaws and feature omissions, the iPhone is, on balance, a beautiful and breakthrough handheld computer. Its software, especially, sets a new bar for the smart-phone industry, and its clever finger-touch interface, which dispenses with a stylus and most buttons, works well, though it sometimes adds steps to common functions.
Surprisingly, Mossberg finds the touch-screen keypad to be a “non-issue.” The biggest drawback is, not surprisingly, AT&T’s pokey EDGE network, which is partly compensated for by the iPhone’s built-in Wi-Fi capability, according to Mossberg.
The iPhone compensates by being one of the few smart phones that can also use Wi-Fi wireless networks. When you have access to Wi-Fi, the iPhone flies on the Web. Not only that, but the iPhone automatically switches from EDGE to known Wi-Fi networks when it finds them, and pops up a list of new Wi-Fi networks it encounters as you move.
In terms of looks, “The iPhone is simply beautiful,” he says. Other raves in Mossberg’s review:
—“The iPhone is the first smart phone we’ve tested with a real, computer-grade Web browser”
—“its battery life is excellent”
—“One great phone feature is called ‘visual voice mail.’”
—Syncing with Macs and PCs via iTunes works well.
—The glass display didn’t scratch despite being tossed around.
Some drawbacks Mossberg flags (aside from the crappy Edge network):
—Some iPod accessories may not work on the iPhone (e.g. the headset jack is deeply recessed and iPod headsets may need an adapter.)
—There’s no overall search on the iPhone (except Web search) and no easy way to move from top of screen to bottom of screen.
—There’s no way to cut, copy or paste text.
—Because the iPhone has no physical buttons, extra taps are needed to start functions.
—There’s no easy way to transfer numbers directly from AT&T. Users must work through computer-based address books.
—There’s no instant messaging, only standard text messaging.
—The built-in camera can’t record video.
—The browser doesn’t yet recognize Adobe flash, limiting some web functions.
Most of the drawbacks (aside from the crappy EDGE network) are scarcely real problems. In any event, Apple is working on fixing them, some of which will likely be fixable by software updates.
Bottom-line, however, Mossberg (and his colleague Katherine Boehret, who shares the byline) likes the thing. “Despite its network limitations, the iPhone is a whole new experience and a pleasure to use.”
Update: Over at Walt’s AllThingsD blog is an interview between Walt and Steve Jobs. Even with Mossberg, Jobs sticks with his mysterious and imperious (and obviously successful) mode, answering most of Walt’s questions regarding iPhone upgrades and fixes with one sentence “We don’t talk about future products.”
Update: The NYT’s David Pogue has this review of the iPhone. The verdict: it’s amazing but not perfect. The phone is so sleek and beautiful that “it makes Treos and BlackBerrys look obese.” The software is “fast, beautiful, menu-free, and dead simple to operate.” Unlike Mossberg, Pogue isn’t crazy about the touchscreen keypad: “Tapping the skinny little virtual keys on the screen is frustrating, especially at first.” Like Mossberg, Pogue hates AT&T’s EDGE network.
Also like Mossberg, Pogue has a video review of the iPhone which, although corny as all get out, is very informative.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 6:20 PM | Print | Comments (0)
Even if it is slightly downmarket, MySpace is a cash-machine for News Corp., which bought the site along with parent company Intermix in 2005 for $580 million. Now, co-founders Chris DeWolfe and Tom Anderson, who run MySpace inside the News Corp. empire, are rumored to want a bigger share of the booty generated by MySpace.
According to Nikki Finke’s Deadline Hollywood Daily, DeWolfe and Anderson are asking News Corp. honchos Peter Chernin and Rupert Murdoch for a two-year, $50 million employment contract, plus a $15 million development fund of their own.
DeWolfe and Anderson would get $25 million each, which translates into $12.5 million per year in compensation. Finke points out that the likelihood of News Corp. paying this pretty penny is “slim to none” and I’d say that sounds about right.
After all, News Corp. owns MySpace now and although DeWolfe and Anderson were instrumental in starting the social networking service and certainly were necessary for the transition of the property over to News Corp., all Murdoch has to do is snap his fingers and dozens of qualified people would take over DeWolfe’s and Anderson’s slot for, say, only $1 million per year.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 1:59 PM | Print | Comments (0)The Washington Post’s Philip Kennicott tipped me off this morning to a remarkable report (PDF) prepared by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty about how Sunni insurgents in Iraq are using the Internet and media to get their messages out.
It’s a remarkable report because it documents in detail what appears to be a very high level of PR and propaganda sophistication by these rebels. They use press releases, online weekly and monthly magazines, video clips, full-length films and even TV channels to spread their ideas.
The technological and market sophistication is pretty evident in such things as video mash-ups. One, called the “Top 20,” is a compilation video of attacks on U.S. forces and is the culmination of a competition among foot brigades to produce the most spectacular footage. It’s presented in quick cuts and is designed for the “video game” generation of, well, I guess, insurgents.
The insurgents are producing movies too, which are available in a variety of PC-based and mobile formats using Windows, RealMedia and DivX. My favorite film title: Vengeance Against Those Who Violated the Honor of Our Pure, Free Sisters, which is part of a series entitled The Throbbing Vein to Ward Off the Hatred of the Rejectionists.
The Internet, of course, has made this sophisticated level of communication possible, and has done so in a way that is hard to locate the content producers. The report notes that
For the purposes of media production, it is sufficient to note that Internet communications allow insurgents and their sympathizers to transmit whatever materials they need, from video footage to texts, to wherever they need, to as many people as necessary to produce anything from a press release to an hour-long film. At the same time, the use of Internet technology allows insurgents freedom of movement and anonymity that other media platforms do not.Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 10:48 AM | Print | Comments (0)
I have an embarassing confession to make. I pay a huge amount of money to Verizon Wireless every month and I’m not exactly sure what I’m paying for or even how to read my bill. I know I’m not alone, but, hey, I’m in this business and I should be able to grasp a lousy mobile phone bill.
When I got hit with the first nauseating bill, I called Verizon Wireless to have someone explain to me how the tally got so high. I’m ashamed to admit that I didn’t understand the explanation either, but did grasp that if I upgraded to a more costly monthly plan, I’d save money (how’s that for a mind-bending paradox?) so I did. It has more or less worked out that way, with some shocks along the way, but I couldn’t tell you why.
Am I making fewer phone calls? Using fewer data minutes? Sending fewer text messages? Roaming less? Beats me. I do know that I feel like an idiot when it comes to my wireless bill.
Now, along comes AT&T and Apple with what seems to be a simple rate plan, and the skeptic in me says perhaps it’s deceptively simple. There are three rate options: $59.99, $79.99 and $99.99.
All three offer unlimited data options, which is so cool. The only thing that appears to vary among the three is voice minutes — the $99.99 option maxes out at 1,350 minutes, while the $59.99 option offers 5,000 night and weekend minutes, instead of unlimited nights and weekends.
Text messages are capped under all three plans at 200. So, iPhone customers can control their spending if they know how many text messages they sent and how many voice minutes they used.
The iPhone itself may be a revolutionary force in personal electronics, but it seems to me that the iPhone rate plan could be an even more important revolutionary force in mobile service billing.
Yet another announcement made by Apple and AT&T this morning propels the iPhone to some level of consumer nirvana never conceived of before. The iPhone can be activated at home using iTunes. No more standing around for 90 minutes in cramped retail stores amid unhappy and oftentimes psychotic customers, not to mention surly and disgruntled employees.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 9:55 AM | Print | Comments (1)
A lot of web radio listeners are waking up to confusion this morning because their favorite music sites are silent. That’s intentional as webcasters form a silent wall of protest against a royalty fee hike that could force them out of business.
The new rates, put forth by an arm of the RIAA called SoundExchange and adopted by a body of Congress called the Copyright Royalty board, could raise payments that online radio stations pay to recording artists by at least 300%, according to a coalition of webcasters called SaveNetRadio. Although some major companies are involved, including Yahoo! and MTV, most of the webcasters who will be hit by the fee increases are small outfits who can ill afford the extra costs such as The Geek Radio, PopFusion Radio and IndieAirplay.
The full list of webcasters participating in the silent protest is here (PDF). Although a bill has been introduced that could derail the new rate hikes, they’re expected to go into effect on July 15.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 9:19 AM | Print | Comments (0)
The Communications Workers of America released a study yesterday that shows the U.S. lagging behind other industrialized nations in the availability and use of high-speed Internet connections. The research, based on speed tests conducted from nearly 80,000 broadband users who visited a CWA site called speedmatters.org, found that the median download speed in the U.S. is 1.9 Mbps, compared to 61 Mbps in Japan, 45 Mbps in Korea, 21 Mbps in Finland, 18 Mbps in Sweden and 7.6 Mbps in Canada.
Those stats, moreover, really don’t take into account the 30% to 40% of U.S. residents who access the Internet via dial-up because most dial-up users didn’t bother to go to speedmatters.org for the test. So, the sorry fact is that the 1.9 Mbps download speed is, if anything, an overestimate.
The telecom labor union produced an interesting report (PDF here) that breaks down speeds by state. The state with the fastest broadband connectivity based on the tests? Rhode Island, with a median of 5 Mbps downstream (and a remarkable 1.7 Mbps upstream.) The state with the slowest speeds? Alaska, with a measly median of 545 kbps and 206 kbps upstream.
Of course the CWA has some policy prescriptions for solving this underachievement, the most interesting of which is to establish a goal of achieving at least 10 Mbps download (1 Mbps upload) in the U.S. by 2010, one of the more modest and attainable speed targets put forth in DC. The other recommendations: collect better data on broadband speeds, maintain an open Internet, reform universal service, establish public-private partnerships and safeguard consumers and workers.
And, of course, the CWA has a dog in this hunt — to achieve higher speeds, broadband network providers have to, more or less, upgrade plant and equipment, which means more jobs for the union’s employees. But still, there’s no denying that broadband speeds in the U.S. stink.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 8:23 AM | Print | Comments (0)
Blogs We Read
