iPhone OS 3: The moat strategy vs. features-fetishism

The chattering class has a fetishistic indulgence with smartphones bordering on techno-porn:


Rumors were in full swing on the eve of Apple’s introduction of the iPhone OS 3.0 and virtually all of the speculation was about whether Apple would include one feature or another that some other phone already had.

Two days ago in iPhone OS 3.0: Refinement or a leap? we outlined the last two stages of the iPhone evolution from a device to a platform:


We anticipated that — despite all the rumors — iPhone OS 3.0 would not be a radical leap but a maturity play. And it was. Apple kept it simple:


While this garnered a collective yawn from the features-fetishists, barring a product introduction disaster, the iPhone OS 3.0 will do to iPhone-killers what it did do to iPod-killers half a decade ago. Apple consolidated its gains, marked its territory of 30M users+25K apps+800M downloads and built a very deep and wide moat around it. A moat so formidable that there’s not a single smartphone player capable of overcoming it.

Déjà vu all over again

At the start of his turnaround of Apple about a decade ago, Steve Jobs gave a keynote in which he went through, one-by-one, all the fears and concerns the industry, Wall Street and the media had about the viability of the beleaguered company. He then discussed what Apple was going to do to dispel them. Starting with the chaotic product line consolidation into a “product quadrant,” Digital Hub strategy and the iMac, Apple went about striking through all the real and perceived objections in the following few years. Instead of fear and denial, there was acceptance and execution.


Similarly, last year at the introduction of the iPhone 3G, Jobs went through the very same process by displaying all the objections to the original iPhone as a business tool and detailing how Apple accepted such reservations and eliminated them one-by-one in the upgrade.

Developers, developers, developers

During yesterday’s address to its developers, Apple was following the same game plan of acceptance and execution with two simple objectives: (1) eliminate as many perceived and real reservations iPhone customers may have in choosing the iPhone, and (2) provide a wide range of incentives to what’s already the most impressive mobile developer ecosystem to prevent any defections to rival platforms.

The iPhone is not the cheapest, the most widely distributed or the most open device in the market. Why should developers prefer it then? Apple offered a few thematic reasons:


These and a thousand other new APIs are wrapped inside what’s inarguably the most sophisticated mobile SDK in the industry. Every one of these new APIs is designed to both help developers create new type of applications and open up avenues of new revenue at the 70/30 split. Take just one example where developers got device-control API access to the 30-pin port (which earlier created a multi-billion dollar ecosystem for the iPod):


Show me the money

The “Accessories” APIs alone represents concrete opportunities for thousands of new applications most of which we likely haven’t seen yet on any existing platform, translating into hundreds of millions of app downloads over the next few years, and thus growing the App Store into a multi-billion dollar revenue source 70% of which will go directly to developers.

While analysts and competitors were busy making feature-level comparisons (of mostly hardware), Apple consolidated its platform lead and laid the foundations of a new growth engine the likes of which the mobile industry has neither yet seen nor fully comprehends.

No developers, no users

Since developers go where the users are, Apple also methodically eliminated the vast majority of iPhone’s “missing” features: copy and paste, landscape text entry, global search, notifications, MMS, voice memos, new calendar format, Notes sync, stereo Bluetooth support, extended parental controls, browser auto-fill and anti-phishing… pretty much anything else that may have given potential customers a pause previously. Of course, we haven’t been shown all the new APIs and we still don’t know what the upcoming iPhone hardware is capable of.

Forest. Trees.

One might wonder at this point if there’s ever a way to fully satisfy the features-fetishists. Video recording/conferencing, voice control, background processing and a host of other capabilities may have to wait for the next iPhone version, when users can perhaps better enjoy the fruits of faster processors, 4G speed and Apple’s PA-Semi acquisition. Apple’s not in the business of feature-complete perfection or geek satisfaction. It’s merely seeking meaningful profit maximization as a business and inspiring transformation of industries it touches as a culture.

By the end of 2009, we expect the virtuous cycle to kick in and the moat strategy to reveal just how difficult it will be to compete against Apple’s touch platform, thereby ushering in consolidation in the rest of the smartphone industry.

42 thoughts on “iPhone OS 3: The moat strategy vs. features-fetishism

  1. Another feature for developers is the apps are in the C language, unlike any other mobile platform. If you have an existing app written in C code, which is most of the world’s applications, then it is straightforward to bring that app to iPhone and make additional revenue off it.

  2. Pingback: Apple The Storekeeper « counternotions

  3. Pingback: Apples iPhone Strategy | Nikki's View On The World

  4. Pingback: What will the next iPhone be called? « counternotions

  5. @ Daniel

    You say:
    “Though, I believe that Apple got where it is, today, with the iPhone by accident (or serendipity) rather than by strategic planning.

    The original iPhone was a closed system; then Apple (reluctantly) provided tools for writing iPhone web apps… Yech!

    I will agree with you that even Apple has been surprised by the phenomenal success of the app store. However, I disagree with the rest of your statements.

    Apple ALWAYS planned to open up the iPhone to developers – just not at first. These guys are very smart and in some ways conservative. They knew that they were going into new territory with a cell phone, and they wanted to minimize the number of distractions narrow the dimensions for error. So they created the revolutionary UI, but limited other features, and put it out on only one network. This allowed them to limit the problems that came up and to more quickly identify the causes and fix them. it also allowed them to judge the degree of success they would have before opening up to outside apps.

    Look back on what actually happened. They DID have quite a few problems, but they were able to address them in a short time frame and thus meet the very high expectations that Apple customers have. The result was the extraordinary satisfaction ratings they achieved.

    Once this “break-in” period was over, then they added features and released the SDK & Apps store.

    Personally, I believe this was their plan form the beginning. Tho they were probably stunned by the interest in the app store by both developers and users.

  6. Pingback: Design Sojourn | Strategic Industrial Design Blog » Apple’s iPhone Strategy is Now Clear

  7. Nice try, but what about the BlackBerry Storm? Or the newest iPhone killer from Palm? Huh?

    Oh, sorry, I thought I was indulging my techno-porn device fetish on thestreet.com, with my favorite techno-porn star, Gary Krakow. I just love it when he has a breathless article about BlackBerry, right next to an ad for….BlackBerry.

    All kidding aside, thanks for the insight, it’s refreshing to read something deep and insightful about Apple’s strategy.

  8. Nice read for my first visit to your blog.

    One additional thing that Apple has going for it related to apps that none of the other phone makers has – the iTouch. Apple may have sold only 17 million iPhones, but when you add 13 million iTouches sold, it brings the number of devices an app writer is writing for to over 30 million. All with nearly identical hardware and identical OS’s so that the headache of “dumbing down” an app to play on the lowest common denominator device is not present. Ask a developer of apps for WinMo or Symbian how easy it is to write a full-featured app that can be used by a wide audience is. Apple’s ecosystem makes it extremely easy to develop an app for a large audience with minimal compatability issues, and that is a HUGE plus for developers, as well as something no other phone maker can match.

    Huge moat, indeed.

  9. Pingback: Malvania’s Weblog » Archive » Mobile OS - Current & Future

  10. @Dick Applebaum: Have you looked at the SDK (including documentation)? Do you really think it was “cobbled-together”? Do you really think Apple put together and tested that SDK in 6 months? I don’t, even if they are super-human coders and documenters.

    Why do you discount what Jobs said to John Markoff of NYTimes on Jan 22 2007 and at AllThingsD on May 30 2007 about Apple trying to find a way to secure applications and it would take time? Wouldn’t one think those comments point directly to an SDK already in process? (SDK was also awaiting the completion of Leopard on which it was based).

    Given what has happened, you should really watch again the Jan 22 2007 intro by Jobs. It’s clear that he saw iPhone as the second coming of the Mac (which is a platform). The whole “web apps” thing was typical Apple deception, as the SDK wasn’t ready and Apple wasn’t going to give a clear reading to any competitor.

  11. @Lasse: “Wouldn’t it be possible now to build a good camera as an accessorie”

    Actually, anything you can plug in to an iPhone (or connect by BT, WiFi or Cell) can be used as an accessory.

    This includes IR, RFID, felica, Barcode readers, credit card readers, printers, medical devices, ATMs, cash registers, security systems, auto diagnostics, home theaters…

    … Oh, yeah! Macs and PCs, too!

  12. Daniel,

    Razors AND razor blades.

    Good read!

    Though, I believe that Apple got where it is, today, with the iPhone by accident (or serendipity) rather than by strategic planning.

    The original iPhone was a closed system; then Apple (reluctantly) provided tools for writing iPhone web apps… Yech!

    Later, Apple realized the potential of what they had, and introduced a cobbled-together “Developer” ecosystem and created (or acknowledged) a mobile platform.

    When we look back, the most significant moment, in all this, may be when Apple delayed Leopard by diverting OS X resources to the iPhone.*

    The 3.0 software release sets the bar, draws a line in the sand, digs a moat… whatever!

    It changes everything!

    I bought my first personal computer in 1978– one of several thousand maimframe geeks who saw the potential…

    Now, in 2009, the audience for the mobile platform is billions! And they’re not techno-geeks.


    *And every enhancement (accessory, Developer API, hardware/software feature and app) to the mobile platform can be folded back into the immobile platform: OS X and the Mac (except, maybe those form-fitting cases).

  13. Lasse: “Wouldn’t it be possible now to build a good camera as an accessorie”

    I haven’t yet seen the new SDK. Theoretically? Why not. One issue might be latency of saving large (RAW?) files through the 30-pin port to iPhone’s Flash disk. Of course, we haven’t seen the new camera in the upcoming iPhone.

  14. Wouldn’t it be possible now to build a good camera as an accessorie when you can write an own program for it. For me it would be a superb solution with a really small camera with a good lens directly connected to the 30-pin port.

    What do you think?

  15. Add my compliment to the many on your article, Kontra. Apple did as much for iPhone with 3.0 as they did last year about this time – a gentle reminder.


    I believe Snow Leopard will provide the foundation for many of the CPU/GPU improvements in the next iPhone hardware improvement. I wouldn’t doubt Apple releases Snow Leopard to get field experience and bug fixes, then release a cleaner iPhone. It is far easier to patch an OS on a computer than on an iPhone.

    And I bet a 5-6 MP camera will be part of the next hardware rev just to shut up those feature fetishists.

  16. Kudos for another aerial view that pull together the business strategy behind a mind-bending technology roadmap, which provided quite a Kontrast to other tech overviews I read this morning regarding the announcement of Microsoft’s IE 8 and Silverlight 3 beta. I’ll alter the take slightly and Kompare what we can gleam from these announcements in the last couple of days. The strategic attempt by MSFT to copy, catch up, and overtake Adobe Flash using Windows desktop dominance is classic. In certain feature details, you can even apply the word ‘innovative’ to some R&D being pursued by Adobe and Microsoft. But how do the features translate to dollars for everyone else and the economy as a whole? The answer is cloudy at best (pun intended).

    What we have not seen, besides from Apple, is innovating and growing actual new business markets and models that include fore-thought on the whole ecosystem and user culture – software, hardware, partnerships, and venues. It’s almost Kounter-intuitive to the Apple-Kool-vs-Microsoft-Boring-business labels typically slapped on them. Here Apple reveals more and more a clear business plan on taking the sector to a new market growth using steady, guided steps, really utilizing the creativity of the users and software partners, whereas Adobe, Microsoft, and the rest fight for the cool factor with one single focus on a “rich” interface – ONE focus, no matter how many features.

    Pushing their respective RIA platforms on both the server and client side is the first obvious survival step for Adobe and MSFT, and no doubt they will continue to sell lots of new IDEs and server software and keep making money for themselves, but how do their developers and business partners benefit in the short and long run? How does Silverlight pump up a market already over-saturated with Flash? How do running Flash or WebOS make a mobile device more business and user friendly and device ready?

    For iPhone developers, the roadmap is clear.

  17. Fascinating scenarios emerging for Apple with the truly mobile web, enabled by a family of devices (+ accessories), a tribe of users with layered connectivity options (cell – wifi – bluetooth), and a developer community empowered by a unique software stack.

    It’s going to be a very interesting 18 months!

  18. Daniel: “Don’t you think that Nokia could leverage its massive market share to come onboard with some new ideas?”


    Massive market share of dumb phones, little presence in the US, plus weak, visionless management don’t equate to a level of innovation needed to overcome Apple’s moat.

  19. Don’t you think that Nokia could leverage its massive market share to come onboard with some new ideas? Apple may have built this massive moat around themselves, but Nokia already has a pretty big castle not too far from the drawbridge.

  20. The tech-savvy are always saying that the iPhone can’t do this or can’t do that and every other smartphone in the entire world has had these features ten years ago. If these statements are true, then why don’t some of these companies have a massive lead over the iPhone in market share. In fact, some of these companies that had smartphones with all these features are nearly on the brink of bankruptcy.

    The tech-savvy say that Apple is always trying to cheat buyers by holding back features just so they can bleed buyers in the future. I’d like to know what company doesn’t do that. Is there any company who gives everything the first time around and never offers an upgraded product? Who wants to run a closed-end business where you can’t sell anymore products because there’s nothing left to offer. If the business fails, then the product user is really orphaned.

    Sure, I understand that Mac products aren’t perfect, but for the average user that can afford them, the majority of the users are satisfied with the product despite the fact that users from another platform say that the products are inferior as far as hardware features are concerned.

    The main aim of a good product is that it’s easy to use, does the job well for the user and if something goes wrong you can get customer support. Features lists are basically for bragging rights. The more features you can put on a list, the more the owner can say he got for the money spent even if he doesn’t need all those features. (one of the reasons I loved MS Word because it had more features than you could ever use and 90% of them I never did use).

    This no background apps outcry is really beyond my understanding. If the foreground app is lightning fast that should be more than enough. If you can get your push notification without it, then so be it. The iPhone is after all, a mobile PHONE, not a workstation. I sincerely would rather give up background processing for battery life any day of the week. And a responsive foreground app is much more important to me since that’s the one I’m using at the time. Who the heck does print-spooling or 3D rendering on a smartphone, anyway? I am not putting down smartphones that can do background processing. If that’s what the user wants, then more power to them. But the average user doesn’t care what’s going on behind the scenes, they just want to get done what needs to be done as fast as possible and hopefully with as little battery drain as possible.

    Apple’s mobile SDK is only a year old and I think that it is progressing rather quickly compared to many other mobile platforms that have been around for five or six years. From the developer activity surrounding it, I would say that it certainly has a future. Apple is guiding it in a certain direction and I don’t see what’s wrong with that. Unhappy developers can always go to another platform. That’s their choice. But the iPhone is turning some individuals into rich and happy individuals, so it can’t be all that bad.

    I’m backing Apple fully on how fast they want to progress in hardware and software. In another year, there’ll be even more things the iPhone can do and it will probably still be ahead of the curve in ease of use. It still won’t be the perfect smartphone, but there probably never will be such an animal.

  21. labrats5: “a better app store”

    The App Store is far from perfect, but I doubt Apple will do anything to complicate it. Remember, any-song-for-$.99 simplicity was one of the cornerstones of the original iTunes Store. Apple also strongly resisted, for example, variable pricing and other schemes the labels wanted.

    “I need app’s popularity weighted by total revenue”

    I hear you, but Apple will never expose revenue numbers to users in any way.

    “Support for trials and demos”

    This does complicate it for users, but Apple may come up with a solution.

    “potentially break legacy apps…differentiate between lowest common denominator apps and those built excusively for the new hardware”

    We have this on Macs. The iPhone could easily display only the apps in the Store that it can properly run, which might necessitate either an automated test suite or a profile form to be filled in by developers.

    Now, where’s resolution independent UI when you need it. :-)

  22. Blad_Rnr: “Still waiting for iChat”

    iChat has several embedded issues for Apple on the iPhone: hardware, battery-life, video, compatibility with non-iChat clients and consideration for other/potential players like Skype, as third party iPhone platform supporters.

  23. Great analysis, Kontra. I especially like the outcome bucketing (monetization, accessories, games, media), further onion peel-back on accessories, as it gets to the nut of the equation.

    My analysis is simple. Customers don’t buy features, they buy outcomes. And, this is a platform play, and developers are the canaries in the coal mine of a successful platform play.

    Coming at it from a different perspective, I very much reached the same conclusion in my post:

    ANALYSIS – iPhone 3.0 Developer Preview: Block the Kick Strategy (http://bit.ly/ANdMz)

    Excerpt: Apple’s iPhone 3.0 Developer Preview was what I call a “block the kick” announcement. What’s a block the kick? It is an effort to do such a good job of persuading your core constituency that any perceived momentum of the competition pales in comparison to your own that you block the competition’s nascent momentum in its infancy. With 30M units sold across the iPhone + iPod touch line of multi-touch handhelds, and 800M downloads across 25K developer apps, today’s event is about running up the score, lest the competition finds its footing with developers.

    In any event, excellent post.


  24. Great article! It occurred to me while watching that Apple is moving forward on three fronts:

    1) Extend the developer market with new APIs, accessory pin support, etc.
    2) Extend the user base with new features.
    3) Extend monetization with additional revenue generators like in-app transactions, accessory licensing fees, etc.

    These combine for a formidable moat, as you point out. Few pundits have commented thus far on the fact that this is all achieved through software, and will work on existing devices, including the iPod touch. Next-gen models should offer their own surprises, but the software improvements alone should give competitors pause.

    Just brilliant.

  25. @labrats5:

    I think the App store needs to have a really good search function so a consumer can just spell out the functionality he wants and it gives him the app list by those most applicable (with paid placement on the side). Sound familiar?

    As for development, Apple has always used the “trust us” approach. “Follow our coding guidelines, use our APIs and the SDK, and we’ll carry you through the best we can.” Other than the Mac System 9-to-OS X (or Carbon to Cocoa) transition, Apple has pretty much held up their end of the bargain for Macs, and it seems it’ll be the same approach for iPhone.

  26. Very intelligent article. While everyone else is bitching about how they’ve only now done copy and paste, every mobile developer in the world (with few exceptions) is coming to the same conclusion: it makes no sense not to develop all your software for the iphone. As said before, the proliferation of mobile OS competitors is nothing but a good thing for Apple, since that makes this decision even easier. But of course there are still challenges.

    As an iphone developer, there are basically 2 things I really want right now. One is a better app store. I need app’s popularity weighted by total revenue, not unit sales. As it stands cheaper apps will naturally have higher unit sales, and thus populate the top of the list. This is the main reason for the infestation of 99 cent apps, and this simple move would go a long way to elliminate that. Support for trials and demos would also help sales of more expensive apps. The ability to sort by price when searching for apps. support for redemption codes so that I could sell PC or mac software and my customer could then get the sister iphone app more cheaply. These, along with thousands of others, to make the apps store the best place to sell my software on any platform, mobile or not.

    The next thing I want is some sort of roadmap or long term strategy for hardware migration. The iphone today is running on the same processor it did 2 years ago. It is using the same size and resolution screen as two years ago. Now, it’s completely obvious that these things must eventually change, but any change to either could potentially break legacy apps. Moreover, how is the apps store going to differentiate between lowest common denominator apps and those built excusively for the new hardware? The inevitable realease of an iphone with a next-gen mobile cpu, greatly complicates the simple ecosystem that attracted many developers to the iphone in the first place. Apple needs to address this looming fear.

    Even with these problems, the iphone is in a class of its own for developers. Apple’s 3.0 SDK update just pwned the entire mobile industry. Too bad the feature fetishists are too stupid to realize it.

  27. Great article.

    Especially like the moat – which was my first thought as I got the play-by-play from the event. The accessories tied to Apple’s unique dock connector (read “moat”), extends the iPhone OS software platform (established in iPhone 2.0) to hardware. The peer-to-peer connectivity is like Friends & Family was to cell plans if Apple doesn’t open it up to other non-Apple phones (read “moat”) or it’s setting the standard (if Apple does opens it up).

    I love watching Apple because it’s great to see their strategy unfold. First, they used a paradigm-changing interface for a well-known/ubiquitous tool (the cell phone) and the loyalty of their iPod/Mac customer base to sell iPhones/touch. This created a base of users with which to attract developers to their SDK that only runs on Macs and shares its foundations with Mac OS X. Then they use the thousands of apps from developers to sell iPhones/touch. Beautiful. What Apple has done will be a business case to be analyzed and learned from for many years.

  28. Still waiting for iChat on the iPhone/iPod Touch. That would be a KILLER app, even if they could only do 15 FPS over ATT’s 3G network. Heck, make it WiFi only. Think of all the games that could take advantage of that feature. Every teenager in the country would want one.

  29. On another tack here…

    You talk about the evolution of the iPhone from device to platform. This is important. What you left unsaid was how this illustrate the absolute brilliance of Apple.

    This was, of course, all planned. (I doubt they foresaw the incredible success of the apps store.) In fact, this is exactly how they do things and waht makes them so successful.

    When they launched the iPhone they were going into new territory, and they did so cautiously. Instead of loading up on features and outside apps, and allowing any carrier, they went slowly and concentrated on a positive user experience. Yes there were some glitches, but these were limited, and they were able to fix them all quickly *precisely because of the limitations they had placed.*

    This focus on user experience – not only in features such as the new UI, but in stability – this is what sets them apart from the rest. (Look at the total fiasco of RIMM’s Storm. Did they ever get it fixed?) It is also what gives them 90% very satisfied ratings.

    So – as you say – they 3.0 is going to set them up as even further ahead of the competition. There will be whole classes of apps that will just not be possible on any other phone. Then, when the next gen iPhone comes out…

  30. Once again, another great analysis from Kontra!

    What did you expect from Mr. Thurrott? He would rather talk about where the dock will be located in Windows 7 than the game, set, match Apple just levied on the mobile industry. No analysis. No objectivity. No thinking that maybe there is something about to swamp MSFT’s attempt’s at WinMo. Heck, they can’t even get version 7 out the door. Paul is a shill. Why people read his MSFT-centric world view makes me scratch my head…then beat it against a table.

    I am not saying everything Apple does is great and wonderful. People still look at me and wonder why I can’t do MMS on my iPhone. But Apple is still new in this industry and they have turned it upside down. In less than two years they have a huge platform that Ballmer must be gnashing his teeth over every time the iPhone is mentioned. MSFT and Thurrott can pump up WinMo all they want. At the end of the day it’s all about the very points you made above: build a ground-breaking phone, build an amazing UI for it, build a developer market then make money, and lots of it.

  31. Great article, I echo B above.

    A few notes.

    My theory is that the proliferation of competitors is GOOD for Apple. I am sure you can see my point without explaining but…

    The iPhone will be THE standard and the rest will be “others” to compete amongst themselves. This will actually inhibit potential dominance of any of the other systems.

    Let’s face it, iPhone is the real McCoy, why should someone buy any other?

    1- They hate Apple – OK Apple will never get this group no matter what.

    2- They must have feature X (software or maybe keyboard) – Well, there goes a few more.

    3- Hate ATT – some more, tho there are rumors that this might change.

    4- Absolutely LOVE device X – some more.

    5- Business wedded to RIMM – This is a significant chunk, but iPhone will whittle away at this as their services improve.

    6- Device price – this is foolish since even $200 is small in comparison to cost of even minimal plan.

    Now add all these up and you get what percent of the *future* market? 25? 40? 50? No one know, but my guess is 30-40% So now there are 5 other systems (I add Nokia) fighting for a share of 40% of the market. So, as a developer, who are you going to develop for first? And like you say, users will go where the apps are

    The killer –

    I believe the next iPhone will be a device so powerful that it will blow the socks off the competition.

  32. What an amazingly insightful and intelligently written article. Nothing the business analysts at Apple don’t know though :-)

  33. I’m very excited to see what Apple will design with the PA-Semi team. I’d really like to see them take some of that cash pile they have and re-invest in ARM. And of course dump more money into Imagination. Apple would be in a unique position that no other mobile manufacturer could touch.

    Not only would they design their own SOCs, but would be able to work closely with ARM and Imagination to integrate technologies and make sure everything is optimized for OpenCL.

  34. Great article!
    I was thinking the same when I saw the video yesterday. After the first part of the video (before the announcement about customer features), I thought to myself “well, Apple kicked everyone’s ass again on the mobile phone”. Apple is going after a platform, not a checklist of features. If you want a true features list comparison, make sure you include the new 1,000 API’s for the iPhone and then see how that stacks up against the competition.
    Also, there is the iPod Touch. Even if Palm, RIM, and others sell much better than the iPhone, they still have to compete in the platform as a whole, which includes the iPod Touch. As a developer, I have 30 million customers for my apps with the exact same OS running on almost the exact same hardware. Why would I want to create apps for other mobile platforms? Even if some people buy a “better” phone based on a feature list, they might get an iPod Touch. This will still make the customer base grow. The moat is indeed big, far bigger than pundits and analysts realize.
    Again, thanks for an insightful article!

  35. Great article. Refreshing to finally see analysis that focuses in on what Apple is really up to. The drum banging of the feature fetishists as you call them is tired and annoying.

    Next year at this time will really be interesting. Hell, fall of this year most likely.

  36. Wow.

    Thoughtful, rational, intelligent. …I’m stunned

    Don’t read much stuff about Apple like this these days.

    Thank you!

  37. And don’t forget: they have to reserve some features for the next update! It is very clear that the iPhone OS is currently on a year-by-year update cycle, so I bet that they already are planning which features will go into iPhone OS 4.0 next year. If they would pump everything in the update today, there would be nothing left to wow the crowd next year.

    The really great thing is that almost all of the new features of 3.0 will even be available for first generation iPhones! That means you’ll be walking around with a top-notch full-featured machine, although the hardware might be two years old.

    • Michael Cysouw: “they have to reserve some features for the next update!”

      I hope so. ;-)
      I think the next version may shape up to be a device play, again.

Comments are closed.