Tag Archives | Apple

[UPDATE: The survey is now closed. Thanks to the 2150+ people who participated–here are our results, and here are more comments from respondents.]

I’m pleased to report that nearly 2,000 folks have responded to our iPhone Satisfaction Survey. We’ll close the survey Sunday morning, but as of the time I’m writing this, there’s still time to participate. If you own an iPhone 3G or original iPhone and would like to do so, please head here to take the survey. Thanks! We’ll publish an extensive report on our findings next week.

[UPDATE: The survey is now closed. Thanks to the 2150+ people who participated–here are the results and here are more comments from respondents.]

Since the original iPhone was released fifteen months ago, it’s been– by almost any measure–the single tech product that’s generated more news and controversy than any other. And things have only heated up with the debut of the second-generation model, the iPhone 3G.

As with any tech product, the ultimate bottom line on the iPhone is whether the folks who have plunked down money for one are happy with their purchase. Enter Technologizer’s iPhone Satisfaction Survey. We’re going to collect data from a bunch of iPhone users (both the original model and the 3G) on what they like, what they don’t like, what they’re doing with the phone, and what they’d like to see future iPhones do. We have no idea what the data will reveal, but we know it’ll be really, really interesting. And once we’ve crunched the results, we’ll report back in an article.

If you’ve got an iPhone, please help by participating in the survey–it should take about fifteen minutes of your time. Please let other iPhone users know about it, too; the more responses the better.

[UPDATE: I’m closing the survey Sunday morning–if you’re thinking about taking it, please do so now. And thanks!]

Click here to begin the IPhone Satisfaction Survey.

Back on August 11th, I wrote about Apple’s slogan for the iPhone 3G–“Twice as fast. Half the price.”–and said that “Twice as fast sometimes, but don’t count on it” might be a more accurate slogan. Looks like Apple has come as close as it ever will to conceding the point.

I was just just browsing around Apple.com for a post I’m working on, and noticed that the iPhone section still has the “Twice as fast. Half the price.” tagline. But at some point after my earlier post, Apple appended an asterisk:

The asterisk points to some fine print (really fine, at least on the HP Mini-Note I’m using at the moment), which was there before in some form, but unasterisked:

* Comparisons between iPhone 3G (8GB) and first-generation iPhone (8GB) running on EDGE. Actual speeds vary by site conditions. Requires new two-year AT&T rate plan, sold separately to qualified customers. Visit www.wireless.att.com for eligibility information.

Apple isn’t much on asterisks–actually, I can’t think of a case where it’s used one before. (When it built a “Get a Mac” TV spot around a PC World reference, we had to approve the usage of its mention of our story, and Apple really didn’t want to insert any on-screen disclaimers.) For better or worse, it likes to keep its marketing materials like the bottom of a MacBook or the backside of an iPhone: as clean as possible. And even if you never read the fine print, the asterisk tells you that “Twice as fast. Half the price.” isn’t true in all instances, which makes the slogan way less compelling and therefore less Apple-ish.

But bold claims on behalf of the iPhone without any clarifying footnotes got Apple into trouble in the UK recently, and perhaps it’s decided to be more cautious from now on. I hope so–footnotes may be ugly, but they provide an important consumer service when they’re affixed to words that need additional explanation. Which “Twice as fast. Half the price” certainly does…

Here’s an apparent second example (this was the first) of an iPhone application I’d like to use–one which makes it easier to use multiple Gmail accounts in Web-based form, rather than in Apple’s Mail app–being refused access to Apple’s App Store on the grounds that it duplicates functionality in an Apple product. To quote the rejection letter MailWrangler developer Angelo DiNardi received:

“… Your application duplicates the functionality of the built-in iPhone application Mail without providing sufficient differentiation or added functionality, which will lead to user confusion. …”

Confusion? As a Gmail user, I understood DiNardi’s explanation the moment I skimmed it. Wouldn’t it make sense to let real people determine whether they’re confused by the purpose of his program?

In addition, Apple apparently criticized DiNardi’s app because there’s no way to edit a Gmail account once it’s been entered; you have to delete it and start over again. Possibly a fair point that would be reasonable to bring up in a review of said application. But Apple has okayed more than its share of schlock for the App Store, so it’s not entirely clear why it’s suddenly playing design critic with an app that serves a clear and useful purpose.

Let’s recap Steve Jobs’ explanation of why Apple might reject an iPhone app from last March:

No mention of there being anything offensive about doing something similar to Apple; nothing about apps being nixed because they’re not the most fully realized incarnation possible of an idea.

I’ve said it before and I’ve said it again: An App Store in which third parties aren’t allowed to tread too closely to Apple’s own programs is one that’s vastly less interesting–and one that’s likely to stunt the development of what can be and should be the most exciting mobile platform to date.