I was perfectly happy to largely ignore the iPhone and just find somebody else’s to play with, until a day or two ago. As Friday’s launch has neared, I’ve felt more and more inclind to get one — though the prospect of dropping $500 and being tied to AT&T for two years isn’t appealing at all. Despite my long-held skepticism over the device, I’m genuinely curious to get one and be able to check it out for a while.
As I said, being an AT&T customer for two years is not an exciting prospect for me. I was a customer of the old AT&T Wireless, and bolted within days of the US launch of mobile number portability. So that’s a big stumbling block. But the fact that the iPhone only has an EDGE connection (even though that’s what I trudge along with on T-Mobile) is, for me, the biggest problem. For such a supposedly ground-breaking device, particularly one that makes such a big deal of its “full” web browser, EDGE isn’t excusable, and certainly isn’t worth hanging on to for the duration of a two-year contract.
With that in mind, check out this WSJ interview with Steve Jobs and Randall Stephenson, the CEO of AT&T. It’s worth a read, but the part I’ve highlighted here — Jobs’ defense of only using EDGE — really makes me wonder if he, and Apple understand mobile very well:
Mr. Jobs: You know every (AT&T) Blackberry gets its mail over EDGE. It turns out EDGE is great for mail, and it works well for maps and a whole bunch of other stuff. Where you wish you had faster speed is…on a Web browser. It’s good enough, but you wish it was a little faster. That’s where sandwiching EDGE with Wi-Fi really makes sense because Wi-Fi is much faster than any 3G network.
What we’ve done with the iPhone is we’ve made it so that it will automatically switch to a known Wi-Fi network whenever it finds it. So you don’t have to go hunting around, resetting the phone, flipping a switch or doing anything. Most of us have Wi-Fi networks around us most of the time at home and at work. There’s often times a Wi-Fi network that you can join whether you’re sitting in a coffee shop or even walking along the street piggybacking on somebody’s home Wi-Fi network. What we found is the combination is working really well.
When we looked at 3G, the chipsets are not quite mature, in the sense that they’re not low-enough power for what we were looking for. They were not integrated enough, so they took up too much physical space. We cared a lot about battery life and we cared a lot about physical size. Down the road, I’m sure some of those tradeoffs will become more favorable towards 3G but as of now we think we made a pretty good doggone decision.
It’s lovely that the iPhone has Wi-Fi; fantastic that it will find and connect to networks on its own. But the fact remains that Wi-Fi is not a mobile technology. As Jobs says, it’s great for when you’re in a home, office or someplace with a hotspot. But we’re talking about a mobile device here, not a portable or nomadic one. The user experience — particularly for a device that Apple’s relentlessly hyped as the best thing ever — shouldn’t take such a hit when you’re on the mobile network. The point of mobile devices is that they cut geographic ties to networks. A heavy reliance on WiFi really doesn’t do this.
Furthermore, Jobs’ excuse that 3G chipsets “are not quite mature”, particularly in terms of power consumption and physical size, isn’t particularly compelling. This trade-off (taking his comment at face value) would seem to reflect that it’s more important for Apple to deliver a device that’s built around the media playback experience, rather than the mobile user experience, by putting heavy battery-life demands ahead of data speeds.
So what’s the deal? Are Steve’s excuses just a lame attempt to cover up some other motivation for not including 3G, financial or otherwise? Or does it simply reflect a really poor understanding of mobile?
Update: Apparently AT&T has goosed the speeds of its EDGE network, with some users reporting a significant increase in speeds, up closer to 200 kbps.
Carlo
I agree that I don’t think they really get what mobile is about and unfortunately they are not alone in failing to appreciate that Wifi is a nomadic technology and I have lost count the number of times I have had to make that point even to people who should know better. I am very surprised they are worrying about 3G power as having the phone scan continuously for WiFi networks is going to be a killer on the battery life. Form my perspective I was primarily interested in the interface and having tried the Prada phone it was nice but not for me especially as that phone comes with a rigid plastic cover to protect the screen and I suspect the iphone will need one too.
It’s likely that Qualcomm patent royalties play a part in Job’s decision.
If the iPhone was a 3G device, Apple would need to sign a licensing agreement with Qualcomm The way that Qualcomm would want to calculate royalties is to levy 5% on everything in the iPhone - not just the wireless chipset, but the screen, the WiFi, the software, everything that contributes value to the device.
Let’s say the buy price is $600 - that means a $30 per device royalty. Then multiply that by the predicted volume of 10m devices next year, and that makes $300m of royalties in the first full year alone. When Apple really hit their stride, at 50m devices per annum, they will be paying $1.5bn per annum to Q.
I can imagine that paying 5% of all Apple’s innovation and added value in the device over to Q sticks in Steve’s throat just a little. If consumers are sitting at home or in the office in a WiFi zone, they won’t even miss the 3G - or so goes Apple’s reasoning. So why pay such a big price for it?
Steve
A high proportion of all mobile originated voice alls are made within the home, and I’m sure that the same will be true of the mobile web. Why go to the trouble of booting a PC if you can just use the phone, with all of your usual bookmarks on it in a fraction of the time it takes your PC to boot. And you can use your phone on the sofa, too!
That’s why wifi makes a lot of sense in this kind of device, use the most appropriate technology where it’s available is a lesson many operators have still yet to learn…
Toby: Wifi is neccessary ALONGSIDE an acceptably fast cellular connection, for when you are out and about. EDGE is just not acceptable for the kind of bandwidth-heavy AJAXified full browsing experience Apple are hard-selling here… that kind of extreme punishment when you do try to use the thing outside your house is really not on when you have to pay serious cash for a device that must last 2 years.
having wifi makes sense, of course, it’s not that much extra nowadays.
but mobile web at home? get real. that’s not where it’s used - you know, by the people who use mobile web every day and have used for years. on trains, commuting, on the beach.. in the bar. everywhere but home.
saying that 3g chips aren’t mature is just the same kind of bs that jobs said about 3rd party programs crashing their os as the reason why there’s no native 3rd party app support(prior to releasing web apps as the “solution”, yay). still jobs insisted in calling the os on it os x, to further confuse over optimistic fanboys. 3g chips not mature enough? how come they’re mature enough for others, and if not, why not do some r&d then.
they ran out of time to use a 3g enabled chip just like they ran out of time to develope a decent 3rd party sdk and security models into the os.
all and all.. the phone side seems just tacked on, as if the whole device had been first made as an internet tablet / touchscreen ipod(because it lacks things that are considered standard in mobiles phones). adding a gsm modem to a package like that they should have been able to do in mere months, which they perhaps did.
web apps. yay. they already run in my phone.. and on my internet tablet.. they already would have ran on the ancient nokia 7710. there’s reason why the review units weren’t sent to usual mobile review sites, to people familiar with whats on the market already.
bottom line is that jobs has been “full of it” with excuse damage control all spring whenever questioned why it doesn’t have this or that. giving web apps as the “solution” to 3rd party programs was the biggest joke of all since we knew you could write web apps for it all spring - DUH, it has a browser(the hooks into phone side don’t matter that much).
Dude — it’s the battery. As someone who lives his life on 3g, I can tell you, the battery is the killer, particularly when you are frequently accessing the network (and the iPhone apps and whole experience seems like it is built around frequent network access). While I agree with all your points about mobility vs. nomadic use, I think there’s just no other decision they could have made with current battery technology.
The battery argument is absolutely valid. 3G is a really power drain. And that is especially true if you are in areas with relatively low 3G coverage. I know enough people that have turned the 3G capabilities of their phone off in order to get through the day without a recharge.
I think the decision to favor size and battery life over 3G data speed is understandable. The fact that this also saves a great deal of license fees towards Qualcomm may have made the decision even easier.
Thanks as always for the good comments. While I understand the strain 3G can put on batteries, I’m skeptical that constantly scanning for WiFi is really that much better. Furthermore, given the concerns, why not allow for replaceable batteries, giving users the opportunity to carry a spare?
Really, though, the trade-off of battery life vs. 3G functionality gets to the heart of what I’m getting at here. Apple seems to be saying that it’s better to not have access to what is, in many respects, an essential mobile functionality for such a supposedly groundbreaking device, in order to protect battery life for media playback and other functions.
I have some other thoughts as to why EDGE and not 3G. Let’s start at the beginning - why AT&T? Well, I’d guess they only pitched to Verizon and AT&T. Sprint and T-mobile just don’t hold the promise, I don’t think. We all know that Verizon said no because it’s basically an unbranded handset, and they like their walled garden.
Thus, AT&T. They have 3G, but it’s geographically limited at the moment. Jobs didn’t want to geographically limit the iPhone launch. He likes things all over (with the exception of Alaska, apparently). The second problem is marketing and realizing perceptions. If they market it as the 3G iPhone, people are going to expect it. Thus, you get people in non-3G areas playing with it, they’re like, whoa, this isn’t anywhere near as fast as 3G. Now there’s consumers with an inferior user experience. That’s a big no-no in AppleLand.
That’s why they went with EDGE, in my opinion. They did get AT&T to speedboost the network a bit (which works well for me and my N95).
As for WiFi being a factor, currently, it’s not, but I think it’s going to be soon.
I believe Ricky is correct. Apple effectively had to go with AT&T in the US, AT&T doesn’t have good 3G coverage, and Apple wanted the phone to work everywhere. (AT&T doesn’t even offer a 3G coverage map on their web site, just a list of cities.)
3G is “an essential mobile functionality”? For whom? For us, that’s all. Most people who buy the iPhone will buy it because it’s (already) an iconic design, a status symbol, and by all accounts a really impressive device. With respect to web browsing, what will they be comparing the iPhone to *in the US*? How many EVDO handsets run a real web browser on a 3.5 inch screen?
A friend of mine bought a Nokia N75 from AT&T. I asked him what he thought of it. The first thing he said was that the battery life is crap. His only experience of 3G is the flaming comet that flies across the screen when he boots it up. Turns out he has no actual 3G coverage where he lives.
In Europe I grant you, EDGE won’t cut it. But let’s see what Apple announces for the European market.
Finally, traffic may spike during commuting hours, but at home use is huge. It’s the first observation in this report on mobileTV in Korea:
http://www.janchipchase.com/mobiletv
Mobile TV trials in the UK and Finland showed the same result. Peak hours for i-mode use in Japan have always been in the evenings, at home, with spikes during commuting hours.
The myth is that mobile services are for people “on the go” who want to consume “bite-sized” pieces of content. The reality is that lots of people have nothing to do for hours on end, and like to watch TV, listen to music, and surf the web at home, apart from their families.
Jason
I have some other thoughts on this…
First of all 3G devices can carry data over EDGE or 2.5G so I don’t think its a coverage issue.
I think the reason why Apple went with AT&T is the integration into the carriers network required to support feature rich services Apple is claiming such as listed vmail etc. Verizon and other carriers would not allow thus and it also explains why Carphone Warehouse isn’t getting it in Europe, they are not a carrier.
There is obviously a hardware and software integration required and Apple in this relationship will “own” the iPhone customer with AT&T simply being an infrastructure provider, I liken it to a hybrid MVNO model. With this thought in mind I think Apple will cover the EDGE short-comings with some cleaver compression technology’s in the data space (think i-mode in Japan) whilst making up for it with good battery and thus longer playback time for media files etc.
These are just my thoughts and maybe I’m completely wrong but it makes sense to me.
Steve Jobs is correct about his remark about battery life in 3G, it is a battery killer. And for the average Joe mobility is not a big requirement. They will be more than happy with neighbourhood wifi. Mobility is demanded only by business people, attorneys etc who is not Apple’s market segment.
I read this earlier on my Treo (yea for faster EDGE speeds, thanks Apple) and smiled when I read the statement “Wi-Fi is not a mobile technology.” While I can agree with the sentiment and even be a mobile wi-fi user myself, the fact remains that wi-fi is best used when sitting still and one is able to enjoy the moment. Until every city is like my hometown Philly and has wi-fi everywhere, pitching to casual consumers that wi-fi is mobile when you are moving is not a great discussion.
No 3G because of physical and power constraints. I am pretty sure that this is licked for the next version of the iPhone, but I would not be surprised if it gains a mm or two in thickness because they need ever so more from the battery.
Steve Jobs does get mobility, he also knows that mobile alone is not a compelling solution for the iPod customers he wants. He pitches music done well with telephony and wraps it in a UI with just enough pizzaz that the other device makers look horrible at what they have been doing for ages. Nice move really. Despite a 8GB Treo and a N95 beside me right now, I feel a bit like the UI train is what was the misunderstood aspect the whole time that wasn’t named ‘thinnest device.’ Apple did it and that is great. Now it is up for the other device makers who know mobility to pick up the slack and ensure that what happened in the MP3 space doesn’t happen here.
FYI, great editorial.
What about all those people who get arrested for using someone else’s WiFi? Are the cops going to start stopping iPhone users to make sure they’re not “stealing someone else’s WiFi”?
While a mobile phone is a mobile device, most (but not all) of us spend most of our time in one place or another, i.e. at work, at home, at the pub. We usually go somewhere, and then sit down and stay within a 50m radius of a reasonable period of time.
EDGE is great whilst in transit between these places; for calling, messaging, etc. But it’s only once you’re get to where you’re going that you’ll want to sit still and browse the web, and/or do any more bandwidth intensive activities; and so you can use WiFi.
And 3G is really power-hungry. I have a 3G mobile but have 3G turned off 95% of the time to save battery. I only turn 3G on when I want to browse the web.
I’m in NZ and I can’t wait for the iPhone to get here - I’m guessing we’ll get it on Vodafone, as per the UK, and I imagine it’ll be here early 2008.
The WiFi on the iPhone is CRIPPLED for certain apps not deemable by the great walled garden called ATT (e.g. skype or VOIP app)
I have a dual phone and I don’t think 3G radio is much more power consuming than WiFi.
To confirm this point, it seems that iPhone owners are reporting the same battery life problems present with 3G smartphones:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1022383
Not a surprise for me.
that is the problem with the bluetooth not with the wifi. I had the same problem with my old razr, battery used to drain like hell with bluetooth on.
It seems Jobs gets mobility or at least he understands what people want (as always):
Bloomberg: Apple May Have Sold 700,000 IPhones, Beating Estimate
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a6YRRDri.RfE&refer=home
Maybe the numbers are wrong, but no matter how you cut it the iPhone is a HUGE success. I can’t wait for the European release… I will trash my S60 Nokia in that very moment. I tell this as a Symbian developer and software publisher.
Csaba
I don’t think there was ever any doubt that the iPhone would sell strongly at its launch. But let’s wait a little bit to see if this momentum can be sustained, and just how many average Joes and Janes — that aren’t mobile geeks and/or Apple fanatics — actually buy them before calling it a huge success.
Hi Carlo,
Russell Buckley (your co-author?) predicted less that 100.000 iPhones for 2007 on this very web site.
So I guess there was some doubt on his part
Average Joes and Janes don’t understand 3G and the few shortcomings that iPhone has currently so they don’t care much if Jobs gets mobility or not. They will buy it if they have that kind of money just because the experience simply blows.
Let me tell you a short story. About 2 years ago our company received a PowerMac from Apple for some reasons. We have nothing but PCs at that time. The Mac looked cool and did some cool tricks so slowly and reluctantly we started to play with it. Now, I’m writing this on a MacBook Pro, half of my colleagues have MacBooks and iMacs, the registration code processing and handling of my Symbian software products are handled by a Mac etc. We are developers, we are trying to make objective decisions, but it seems no one can resist. The experience simply blows. Hardware and software perfectly made together. I was a PC guy, and I didn’t understand what was the big deal with these expensive Apple stuff. Now I understand. And there is no doubt in me that iPhone is going to be huge success.
Cs
“Average Joes and Janes don’t understand 3G”
in the USA maybe, think you will find that in europe and the rest of the mobile using world that they do. Maybe not on a technical level, but they sure as hell know when something takes ‘too long’.
the average ‘chav’ (equiv to a redneck i guess) are obsessed by 3g.
even more importantly they tend to be obsessed with text messaging, i really think the iPhone is going to struggle in the UK, with its lack of tactile feedback. Most of my friends who primarily use there phones for text messaging do so often without looking at the screen, pretty much like how a good touch typist does with a full keyboard. Often whilst in conversation with someone else, if they then have to overtly shift there focus to reply to a message, or relearn how to text it will not be popular, never mind the fact it will be very difficult get people interested in any of the features apart from the interface, as when the iphone gets a world wide rollout it will effectivly be a middle of the range handset from four years ago with a fancy interface, and comparable features to anything found on a walkman phone or any other 3g phone, just with a swish interface.
basically i think the iPhone will be a success in the US, due to lower expectations for your mobile services, but it will need more than its pretty looks to get anywhere in the rest of world/countries/areas with 3g coverage. Although 3g is not ubiquitous through out europe, its next to impossible to not get 3g coverage in the larger towns and cities, to the extent where 3g has all but relegated wi-fi hotspots in the uk to nice little areas for people to pass time at in between meetings waiting for a train or plane, and you would struggle to get funding to startup a hotspot service
chuBb: I live in Europe (this is the explanation of my funny name
). I don’t think the lack of 3G will harm the iPhone sales that much. I want full web browser and not opera mini on my crappy 3G Nokia, and anyways, 200kbit/sec is not so slow on a phone if I’m out of wifi coverage. And we both know, 3G will be added to iPhone in the foreseeable future.
About the tactile feedback: I think the future is the touch screen, partly because of its flexibility. You can adapt the user interface (buttons, sliders and other UI elements) for the application, plastic keys simply can’t do that. And ‘button-driven’ UI will never be so fluent and natural as iPhone UI. For example, not easy to create a 4way or 8way joystick driven web browser. Think of the scroll, link selection etc. Feels unnatural and simply pain to use. A simple address book can work much more fluently if you can touch and drag the items on screen.
BTW, mouse was also a debate like this a few decades ago.
About texting: there are videos on the net on 35 wpm iPhone typists and their phones are (obviously) 2 or 3 days old so this is the max. amount of time they’ve spent practicing it.
Cs
Csaba, I disagree about the 3G issue. I live in the UK and as chuBb said, people are aware of what it means and how slow the mobile web is over a GPRS connection. To correct your post: 200KBits/sec is more like average EDGE speed and is not achievable with GPRS (which the iPhone would have to use in the UK if it isn’t 3G). Max speed of that is around 48K.
Especially when you’re selling iPhone’s Safari as a ‘full’ web browser, not one for viewing transcoded WAP pages, that is just too slow. I still think it will sell OK but more as a glorified iPod with a lovely interface. Just for that it’s great for the mobile industry - but to try to sell it to people who use/need the mobile web without 3G is foolish.
Wolf: I don’t quite understand your point. iPhone is EDGE capable. 200kbit/sec (EDGE speed) is more than bearable.
Csaba
Yes, the device has EDGE but the UK hasn’t.
Only one of the 4 operators in the UK (Orange) have an EDGE network and its coverage is not very good. So most users in the UK wouldn’t be able to use that capability, including the O2 network customers who are rumoured to be the only ones that will get the iPhone.
Wolf
Wolf: Apple required AT&T to introduce a few iPhone specific services (and about 3-4x EDGE speedup) by the launch of iPhone.
The same will happen to O2.