iPhone....

#1
It has been the buzz, what are your thoughts?

Things to consider:
•Amazing interface - real web-browsing
•No Java or Flash
•Slower network speeds (EDGE), but the inclusion of Wi-Fi
•Great ***** support (including probable Microsoft Directpush to get Outlook)
•Great iPod and Video interface
•Plus more

What do you think UG?
 
Last edited:
#2
i'd love to get my hands on one, but I'll wait for 2nd gen. to come out.
I would like the price to come down to earth and I'd like voice dialing to be included in v.2

I'm curious to see what other cell phone makers will come up with - I'm sure Bill Gates is keeping an close eye on this and will offer something comparabe in the near future, which should trigger a price war.
 
#3
Hmmmmmmmmm...

Miki or iPhone...
Miki or iPhone...
Miki or iPhone...
Miki or iPhone...
Miki or iPhone...
Miki or iPhone...
Miki or iPhone...
Miki or iPhone...


Life is difficult!

Barnabas
 
#4
I think you should.

Things to consider:
•Amazing interface - real web-browsing
ABSOLUTELY
•No Java or Flash
THIS WILL COME WITH AN UPDATE TO SOFTWARE
•Slower network speeds (EDGE), but the inclusion of Wi-Fi
AT&T HAS UPPED THE CAPACITY OF THEIR EDGE NETOWRKS TO FULL STEAM FOR IPHONE
http://www.macrumors.com/2007/06/28/atandts-edge-network-now-snappier/
•Great ***** support (including probable Microsoft Directpush to get Outlook)
ALL ENTERPRISE TO COME WITH IN THE WEEK
•Great iPod and Video interface
ABSOLUTELY
•Plus more
CHECKING UG INSTANTLY, PRICELESS

What do you think UG?[/QUOTE]
 
#6
iMILF

Now if they were selling the latest iMILF would you be online? I assume that iMIKI is in ref to MILF MIKI? Yes I's like to try out an iMIKI as well.
 
#10
It's a piece of shit.

Uses piece of shit AT&T service only (and over priced service on top of that).

Works on piece of shit apple software and only works with piece of shit Apple itunes.
 
#11
Security Watch : Don't get burned by viruses and hackers

By Robert Vamosi
Senior editor, CNET Reviews
June 18, 2007


Apple excels in creative and innovative marketing. Often it's what they don't tell you that creates the most buzz. For example, we know next to nothing about the Apple iPhone. We know little about the new Leopard release of Mac OS X. Both have generated a lot of press, and so far the hype has succeeded in distracting everyone from a very real concern: the overall security of each. When you strip away all the creative marketing, when you take away the Steve Jobs' induced hype, what you have is a new mobile phone based around an operating system that is just as vulnerable as the next one. Trouble is, Apple isn't being as forthcoming about security as other vendors.

The naked iPhone
For the moment, iPhone will be running a version of the current Mac OS 10.4; in the fall, Apple will presumably upgrade its phones to the newer Mac OS 10.5. So far, the company seems to be rolling out a series of patches, one a month for last year or so, which is good. Apple might, however, want to follow Microsoft's lead and standardize its releases to the second Tuesday of each month.

While the point of a beta is to ferret out the bugs on a variety of different machines before it goes final, some of the flaws disclosed in Safari this week were pretty easy to find.

When flaws are patched, Apple often does not acknowledge the researchers who actually brought the vulnerability to its attention. Apple is known to be looking for more security researchers. It's not an ego thing; by working with the vendor to correct the vulnerability, researchers put in long hours, usually without compensation. A public "thank you" is more than enough. But that hasn't happened.

Shoot the messenger, why don't you?
Instead, Apple has created history of attacking security researchers. Last summer, during BlackHat USA, security researchers David Maynor and Johnny Cache disclosed a wireless vulnerability using an Apple Computer Macbook. The team found that malformed network traffic could allow the laptop to be compromised, and they provided a video of the attack.The researchers did use a third-party wireless card for their video demonstration, but said repeatedly that the Apple Airport wireless driver was also vulnerable.

Apple should stop attacking the messengers--the researchers--and change, as did Microsoft, by working with them.

After BlackHat, Apple rebuked Maynor's employer, saying "despite SecureWorks being quoted saying the Mac is threatened, they have provided no evidence that it is." Apple orchestrated media attention toward third-party wireless device drivers, which is fine because those drivers were patched quickly. Two months after BlackHat, Apple quietly released a patch, which, if the vulnerability that was fixed had been exploited, could have compromised the Airport wireless drivers in Macbooks. Apple forgot to mention David Maynor and Johnny Cache.

Reap the seeds that have been sown?
Ironically, it was another Apple vulnerability that put David Maynor in the news again this week. He was one of three independent security researchers who disclosed vulnerabilities within the new Safari 3*** for Windows beta. Some of the flaws exist on the Mac OS as well. While the point of a beta is to ferret out the bugs on a variety of different machines before it goes final, some of the flaws disclosed in Safari this week were pretty easy to find. In other words, Apple could have found these vulnerabilities themselves during various alpha builds.

Rather than work quietly with the vendor, Maynor and the others made their findings public. A few weeks ago, I interviewed security researcher Chris Soghoian who pointed out that disclosing an Apple vulnerability is almost a guarantee of a lawsuit. Instead, many security researchers would rather find a fault with another vendor. On the other hand, Maynor is rumored to have another Safari exploit primed and ready, one that works on both the Windows and Mac OS versions of Safari. It's ready to go once he gets his hands on an iPhone.
 
#12
iPhone worries
Which brings us to the iPhone. Again, no one outside of an elite few has actually held an iPhone, yet there's legitimate concern about its security. But Jobs has said that it will be a closed operating system, meaning you cannot write mobile applications for it--directly. The carrot Jobs extended to the WWDC crowd was not a software development kit (SDK) for writing applications (which the developers I spoke to all wanted), but a way to write applets within the Safari browser.

As we have seen, security researchers were able to find fault with Safari 3*** within days of its beta. Malware today is almost always financially motivated. The crowd that stands in line on June 29 for the 6 p.m. release of the iPhone has at least $500 to spend, more with the two-year contract to AT&T. These early adopters are going to load their iPhone with important contacts--maybe even download songs and movies that have value as well. In the end, the typical iPhone user may have a target on his back.

Below the surface
Even before the Safari announcement, the underlying Mac OS remains vulnerable, although by locking outside vendors to writing code for the iPhone, the overall security risk could be lower than expected. Eric Chen, writing on Symantec's blog site, said back in January 2007 that the iPhone was prone to two types of vulnerability exposure. One, the Mac OS is based on Unix, and Unix has a number of well-known vulnerabilities that could also affect the Mac OS. While the incentive to exploit these exists today (to give Apple a black eye, not to mention wreak havoc on the Apple community), there's much greater financial incentive in waiting to go after the mobile version of Mac OS in July. Second, Chen worries about the rise of nonstandard software on the iPhone. I think that the latter is somewhat removed now that Safari will be the legit platform for ad hoc programmers.

From an IT perspective, say you want your workforce to switch over--what security guarantees do you have? Does the iPhone include auto update or an update button, or will there be a way to push out updates across the network so your employees can remain patched? And if there's a firewall included, does the user have the ability to tweak it or opt out? These are questions that will be answered in two weeks.

Can't really predict
Criminals today are not writing code to garner "greetz" from their 3l337 crew; they're targeting attacks aimed at the most profitable parts of the Web. Apple may not enjoy the 90 percent saturation of Windows, but of that 5 percent it does hold dear, the relative income of the Apple user base may be enough to finally make Apple a big target.

And of the percentage that purchases the very first iPhone with its two-year contract to AT&T, that too is a financially attractive group for criminals to attack. Given that they wouldn't want to risk compromising the iPhone with gnarly malware infections, Apple might see the light. Apple should stop attacking the messengers--the researchers--and change, as did Microsoft, by working with them. Maybe, with the popularity of the iPhone and Leopard OS, that will happen.

On 6/19/07, I clarified that Apple often does not credit security researchers and that it is looking to hire more security experts.
 
#13
Crave
page options:
A Blog from CNET

Jun 29 2007
AT&T: 2.5G upgrades won't make iPhone Web surfing faster
Marguerite Reardon Post a comment
AT&T says it has spent an additional $50 million in the months leading up to the iPhone launch to upgrade and add more capacity to its 2.5G EDGE network, but a company official said that subscribers shouldn't expect to surf the mobile Net any faster.

"We don't want to set unrealistic expectations," said Mark Siegel, a spokesman for AT&T. "We have been upgrading the network on an ongoing basis, and we've made an additional investment in anticipation of demand for the iPhone."

AT&T has spent over $16 billion since 2005 upgrading the EDGE network.

The iPhone has been criticized for the fact that it works on AT&T's 2.5G network instead of its faster 3G network. But in the last few days, some AT&T subscribers have been reporting noticeably faster data speeds using their 2.5G handsets. And there has been speculation that AT&T gave EDGE a "boost" in the days and weeks leading up to the launch, which happens Friday at 6 p.m. local time.

But AT&T's Siegel said that what customers are likely experiencing are bursts in speed.

"The connection speed depends on so many things," he said. "It depends on the site you're connecting to or the size of the file you're downloading. And sometimes users experience bursts that are above what is typical."

He said the company has not changed what it cites as the average data rates for the EDGE network. He said on average subscribers should expect between 100 kilobits per second and 130kbps.

But even if some users get bursts of faster speeds from time to time, the EDGE network is still much slower than a 3G network. AT&T's 3G network, which uses a technology called HSDPA (High-Speed Downlink Packet Access), gets average data rates of between 400kbps and 700kbps. Verizon Wireless and Sprint Nextel, which use a 3G technology called EV-DO (Evolution Data Optimized), also offer data rates between 400kbps and 700kbps.

So unfortunately, for all the soon-to-be iPhone users, AT&T hasn't magically increased the speed of its network. For truly faster speeds, iPhone fans will have to wait for the next-generation device that will work on a 3G network.
 
#14
Wow...Tell us how you really feel!!!

It's a piece of shit.

Uses piece of shit AT&T service only (and over priced service on top of that).

Works on piece of shit apple software and only works with piece of shit Apple itunes.
I got mine today...after about 600 people got one at Roosevelt Field - I arrived at 8 pm and they still had them in stock and the people kept flocking in.

All in all .. It is an amazing device. ON Wi-Fi it is great. It is a sleak wonderful interface. Not perfect, but once I held it and played with it, I HAD to get one. On EDGE, a but sluggish.. but worth the $$$
 
#16
There will be a dozen of these phones out within a year and with alot more options, choices and freedoms. They'll wipe out the Blackberry market and deservedly so. That's another piece of shit device. What goods the fucking thing when no one can hear you.
 
#17
While the interface and the graphics is way cool on the phone, the fact that it only works on the AT&T network is a deal breaker for me. Many friends bitch about the number of dropped calls on AT&T versus Verizon. Also, where I live (Orange County), AT&T doesn't even provide coverage, so I wouldn't even be able to sign up even if I wanted to. Lastly, no phone is worth $600....and then on top of that the price of the service. And for the high price of the phone, all you get is 8 gig of memory. I also wonder about the battery as well......since you can't replace it yourself and need to bring it to an Apple store if you need to replace it. Would the cell phone insurance even cover the iPhone? If it did, then it would be well worth it to pay the extra $5 a month for the insurance.
 
#19
I was walking by an ATT store in Hoboken and they had the velvet ropes out front for the expected "crush" - but the line was empty. Employees were out front trying to get people in, but the store was empty. While I think it may be a decent phone, pairing an "internet" phone up with a cell service that has weak broadband maybe was not the smartest. And I heard they have a 5 yr exclusive agreement to sell them.

I'll stick with my Palm. (the PDA, guys!!!!)
 
#20
I think the big marketing faux pas both Apple and AT&T made is their projections that the iPhone will sell millions. In one article, it was reported that Steve Jobs said that Apple was going to have 3 million units available on launch day...even though later reports said that that would have been an overly optimistic plan. With so many different phones out there coming from so many different manufacturers, I can't imagine any one particular model being able to sell millions of units. Apple is coming into the game late, so they can't expect to be able to lock in the brand recognition and set the industry standard like they did with the iPod.

Also, how many people are really going to be willing to part with $600 for a cell phone? The vast majority of cell phone users are using them as phones....not for *****, not as a camera, not as a MP3 player, not to surf the web. For the users that are using the phones for ***** and are willing to pay the high price for a PDA phone, they are mostly corporate users and the models are dictated by their employer's enterprise group. In order to adopt their ***** servers to be able to work with the iPhone, they will need to make changes to their server settings, which in the corporate environment, can take months and isn't initiated simply because some users want to get a cool new phone.
 
Top