Tag Archives | Smartphones

Still Needed for the iPhone: A Great Office Suite

Posted by Harry McCracken on June 16, 2009 at 1:33 pm

Documents to GoA year into the era of third-party iPhone software, there may be 50,000 applications for Apple’s phone. But nobody needs that many, of course–hey, they’d be a tight squeeze even if you’ve got a 32GB iPhone 3G S. What you want are…the applications you want. One of the ones I want is a solid, simple Microsoft Office-compatible suite for my iPhone. And I’m still waiting for one that’s everything an iPhone suite should be.

Last year, things looked promising: The two major makers of mobile suites, Dataviz and Quickoffice, both announced plans to support the iPhone. Quickoffice got there first, but did so in drips and drabs: First, it released a version that only had a spreadsheet and some file management tools. Then it added a word processor that lacked core features such as autocorrection. Then it finally came out with an update that’s pretty good, but is still hobbled by the fact that there’s no way for it to get at file attachments in the phone’s e-mail application, since Apple don’t permit it. (Instead, you can shuttle documents back and forth via MobileMe or Wi-Fi.)

Documents to GoYesterday, DataViz announced that its Documents to Go suite was live on the iPhone App Store. And once again, it turns out that it’s less of a suite and more of a work in progress. The current version is a word processor that’s slicker than Quickoffice’s, with two-way file synchronization and optional support for Exchange attachments. But there’s no spreadsheet. DataViz says that people who buy Docs to Go now at discounted prices ($5 without Exchange support, $10 with) will get the spreadsheet for free later.

I’m not sure why it’s taken both companies so long to get their venerable, well-done packages onto the iPhone, other than that building a capable productivity suite that’s compatible with Microsoft Office is a larger challenge than designing even an admirable Twitter client. (Let’s not even discuss fart apps.) I also worry that the pressure on iPhone developers to release apps at the cheapest possible price makes it hard for them to justify investing immense resources in building ambitious stuff: Docs to Go for iPhone may start at five bucks, but the highest-end version of its Palm-based ancestor goes for $90. But maybe suite companies will end up selling enough iPhone products in such high volume that it’ll work out.

Long-term, I remain optimistic: Quickoffice has already made a lot of progress, and a few minutes with Documents to Go’s word processor will tell you that DataViz hasn’t been slacking–it’s just been making sure that what it releases is really good. I also think that Apple will eventually give apps like these the hooks into the OS they need to be integrated with e-mail and other iPhone apps. For now, though, I’m still waiting for iPhone suites to give me everything that came standard on my Psion Series 3 palmtop fifteen years ago.

8 comments

Livespeakr: Little Big Speakers for the iPhone

Posted by Harry McCracken on June 12, 2009 at 5:45 pm

LivespeakrThere’s a surging sea of portable speakers out there for iPods, but ones designed to work well with iPhones are a rarer breed. Which is why I’m impressed with DGA’s Livespeakr, a collapsible, battery-powered speaker setup that was designed with the iPhone in mind and which delivers very good sound quality considering its cost ($99 list in black or white versions; $85 at the Livespeakr site) and size.

Continue Reading →

3 comments

Okay, What’s The Fastest Way to Get Your Hands on an iPhone 3G S? (Which is Not Necessarily the Same Thing as the Smartest Way.)

Posted by Harry McCracken on June 12, 2009 at 12:32 pm

iPhone 3GsI’m not saying it’s a good idea to try and buy an iPhone 3G S on next Friday, the day the phone is released. For one thing, the single best thing about the phone is likely to be iPhone OS 3.0, which every iPhone owner will be able to snag as a free download two days before that. For another, many iPhone 3G owners will qualify for larger discounts on the 3G S if they wait a month or two before upgrading.

But what if you absolutely must have a 3G S on the day of launch–and not only on the day of launch, but as early as possible on that day? (Hey, maybe you’re a tech journalist who wants to write about it while it’s still hot, hot, hot.) You’ve got multiple options, and they all have theoretical virtues and potential pitfalls?

Preordering from Apple for shipment. Apple says that iPhone 3G Ss will arrive on June 19th, the day of the phone’s release. It doesn’t say when on that day to expect them, though. And given that shipping is free, I’m thinking that they’re going out by some method that’s cheaper than priority overnight and therefore they may show up in the afternoon.

Preordering from Apple for in-store pickup. I did this at my local Apple Store, and it was kinda confusing–I used a Web-based signup form, and it never asked me for my name or gave me confirmation that I was all set. And it mysteriously talked about me buying a last-generation iPhone 3G even after I specified that I wanted a 32GB white iPhone 3G S. Given that I have no proof that I preordered, I have these visions of showing up and being turned away. In any event, the Apple Store rep I talked to told me that the store would open at 8am, and that both those who preordered and those who didn’t must wait in the same line. That likely means that it’ll make sense to show up really early. 5am, perhaps? No, 4am sounds safer.

Preordering from AT&T for shipment. The AT&T site seems to be dedicated to the notion that every piece of information must be phrases in a way that’s slightly too vague to be useful. Here’s what it says about shipping schedules:

Pre-orders for iPhone 3G S will be shipped with overnight priority and will be processed to arrive as early as June 19, 2009, if submitted by 12 p.m. noon C.T., June 17, 2009.

You might assume that “shipped with overnight priority” means that the phones will be shipped via priority overnight, and will arrive in the morning. But I’m guessing that AT&T really means that it’ll give priority to getting these phones out for arrival the next day. In any event, it’s very clear that it makes no guarantee that they’ll arrive by June 19th. I’m not sure whether that’s because it’s less confident about supplying demand than Apple is, or whether it’s simply covering itself by promising nothing.

Preordering from AT&T at a local store. AT&T stores are opening at 7am on the 19th–an hour before Apple Stores–and only for folks who preordered. Which makes preordering for local pickup from an AT&T outlet sound like the most efficient wayt to get a 3G S early. But when I tried to order one at my local AT&T shop, the rep told me that I might not get my phone until the 20th.

Thinking all this over makes my brain hurt. But here are some apparent facts:

  • AT&T isn’t promising anyone an iPhone 3G S on the 19th.
  • Apple does seem to be promising phones to those who preorder, and chances are high that you can walk out of an Apple Store that morning with one if you’re willing to wait in a potentially long line. Especially if you preorder, but probably even if you don’t. (With both the first-generation iPhone and the iPhone 3G, I had a phone in my hands within 45 minutes or so of the store’s opening on day one of the launch.)
  • I think it’s possible that the lines for this iPhone will be less insaaaaaane than those for the first two models, but it’s hard to know. The conservative move would still be to show up before dawn.
  • Preordering from Apple for shipment sounds like a reasonably safe way to get a phone on the 19th, but it might not show up until the afternoon.

Given all that, if I were trying to be among the very first people to buy an iPhone 3G S, I’d preorder from an Apple Store and wake up at the crack of dawn on Friday. I’m not saying I’m going to do this. But if I do, you’ll be the first to know…

5 comments

5Words for Thursday, June 11th, 2009

Posted by Harry McCracken on June 11, 2009 at 7:41 am

5wordsLots of little Microsoft stories:

Free anti-virus from Microsoft.

Bing will translate for you.

Microsoft kills off Money completely.

Is Twitter starting to peak?

Smartphone total cost of ownership.

“Web 2.0” is millionth word.

New iPhone: faster than AT&T.

Buy Dell, fly for free.

Lego starts to make gadgets.

A Casio that keeps going.

Cnet reviews the Kindle DX.

Palm gets a new CEO.

This concept notebook folds up.

Facebook bans scammy ad networks.

No comments

Please, AT&T, Just Tell Me How Much You Want For an iPhone 3G S

Posted by Harry McCracken on June 10, 2009 at 4:23 pm

AT&T FrownyI swear that I’m not trying to turn Technologizer into an AT&T bashfest. But I’ve spent part of my afternoon girding myself to get an iPhone 3 GS. I’m ready to pre-order and pay up. So far, though, I’m just confused.

I started at the AT&T Store at my local shopping center. A helpful rep looked me up in the system and said that I didn’t qualify for a discount–I’d have to fork over $599 for a 16GB 3G S or $699 for the 32GB model. He stood there expectantly. But I arched an eyebrow and asked him if he was sure I didn’t qualify for some sort of discount.

He told me that I might, but said that I needed to dial 611 on my phone to find out. Why didn’t he mention this until I asked? How come he couldn’t determine it himself? I don’t know.

Continue Reading →

20 comments

Yes, Original iPhone Owners, I Am Sympathetic

Posted by Harry McCracken on June 10, 2009 at 11:14 am

Original iPhoneWow. My post contending that AT&T’s upgrade pricing for iPhone 3G owners who want to buy an iPhone 3G S is fair has prompted dozens of comments, pro and con. Some of the feedback is from people who bought the original iPhone, which reminds me that they’re in an entirely different situation than 3G owners like me.

The first iPhone was sold under unique and unreasonable policies: The first folks who bought it paid the extremely unsubsidized price of $599, yet were required to sign up for a two-year AT&T contract, just as if they’d gotten a price break. That’s one of the most consumer-unfriendly moves in the history of the cell phone business, which is saying something.

AT&T did at least acknowledge the unique situation by letting owners of first-generation iPhones buy the 3G at the fully-subsidized price. But the fact that those folks were under any contractual obligation to AT&T at all remains pretty darn ridiculous.

It’s one of a number of examples of policies relating to the iPhone being less reasonable than those for garden-variety phones. Another one: I’ve repeatedly bought cell phones from AT&T at unsubsidized prices and found that the company would cheerfully unlock them for me. But it took months before it offered a contract-free iPhone at all, and as far as I know, there are no circumstances under which it will unlock an iPhone for you.

The iPhone is an exceptional product–probably the most important cell phone in the history of cell phones, and an amazing gadget in spite of some significant flaws. But at the end of the day, it’s just a phone. And carrier policies relating to it should be the same as for any other phone they sell.

6 comments

No Specs Please, We’re Apple

Posted by Harry McCracken on June 10, 2009 at 10:35 am

My friend and former colleague Jason Snell, editorial director of Macworld, has a good piece up on the fact that Apple isn’t saying much about just how it made the iPhone 3G S faster–the list of tech specs for the new phone doesn’t disclose its CPU or how much RAM it has, which are probably the two most important aspects of its hardware when it comes to determining how speedy it’ll be.

Apple’s disinterest in talking about the iPhone hardware’s technical details was striking at Monday’s WWDC keynote. When Phil Schiller announced the phone, he said it was really fast and quoted some benchmarks of its improvement in speed compared to the iPhone 3G–and left it at that. If there was ever an assemblage of people who’d be interested in the nitty-gritty of the 3G S’s performance boost, it was the developers in that room: A faster chip and more RAM (which the 3G S surely has) makes the phone a better platform for sophisticated third-party apps. But Apple wants people to focus on what the iPhone can do, not how it does it.

Of course, Apple is willing to talk about its engineering when it suits the company’s purposes–I don’t know of any other computer company that would spend so much time explaining the manufacturing process for its notebook cases, for instance. But manufacturing processes don’t involve numbers, and I think it’s numbers that Apple prefers to avoid dwelling on.

On some levels, I get Apple’s thinking here. I’ve written that tech specs are simply less important than they use to be: It would be a lousy idea to buy (or avoid) the iPhone 3G S based on its clockspeed or the amount of RAM it contains, and neither spec can be reliably used to judge how the iPhone compares to other phones. I’m not sure if Apple’s approach is any less satisfactory than that of tech companies who only know how to speak in spec-ese, and who forget to explain why a normal person should care.

But…

Apple products are, for the most part, bought by adults. Some of those adults are passionate about technology, and want to have a deep understanding of how the products they buy work. We already know that the iPhone 3G contains 128MB of RAM, which is on the tight side; if the 3G S has 256MB of RAM, that’s relevant information. So are basic facts about the processor, if it helps speed up the iPhone experience.

As Jason notes, third parties will break open iPhone 3G S units as soon as they get their hands on them, so we’ll know the phone’s technical vitals soon enough. Which is just one more reason why I wish Apple disclosed this information. It’s got customers who’d like to know; the info can help them understand Apple products better; trade secrets are not involved. Telling those who care to know what’s inside the iPhone would be a nice confirmation that Apple respects the intelligence of its customers.

4 comments

Can Qik Go Legit on the iPhone?

Posted by Harry McCracken on June 9, 2009 at 6:00 am

qiklogoHere’s another question I have as I ruminate on Monday’s WWDC news: Will the fact that the iPhone 3G S has a video camera and Apple is touting video streaming as a major iPhone OS 3.0 feature mean that we’ll finally get an official release of Qik’s nifty videostreaming application on the iPhone App Store? It’s been available on the iPhone for months, but only for jailbroken phones, since Apple hasn’t permitted the camera on the original and 3G models to capture video.

I’m not sure why the iPhone 3G S wouldn’t be Qik-friendly–Apple said today that there will be an API that will allow third-party developers to write apps that make use of the video camera. And while all the examples that Apple has given of streaming video involve stuff coming into the iPhone, the fact that carriers are comfortable with the idea might mean they’d be comfortable with Qik, too. (I don’t think Qik stands much chance of bringing even AT&T’s fragile network to its knees–it’ll likely never be used by as many people as apps for consuming streaming video will be.)

None of which means that the new iPhone hardware and software will make an App Store release of Qik available, of course. We’ll see.

In related news, Qik is announcing today that Qik will ship on all of Nokia’s Symbian S60 phones, starting with the soon-to-be-released N97. Score one for the N97, especially if there’s no good news about Qik on the iPhone in the immediate future…

5 comments

Sorry, iPhone 3G Owners, I’m Not Sympathetic

Posted by Harry McCracken on June 9, 2009 at 1:26 am

iPhone 3GsIf you ask Apple or AT&T how much the iPhone 3G S costs, they’ll emphasize two prices: $199 for the 16GB version and $299 for the 32GB one, as Apple does here. It’s only in the fine print and disclaimers that they’ll explain that only new customers and those who aren’t on a contract (or nearing the end of one, at least) qualify for those deals. Which means that all of us who bought AT&T iPhone 3Gs upon their release a little under a year ago don’t qualify–we’ll pay $399 for the 16GB model or $499 for the 32GB one, assuming we’re willing to extend our contracts for another two years. Which still represents a discount off the no-commitment pricing: $599 for 16GB and $699 for 32GB.

Some folks are irate at this turn of events, arguing that the pricing punishes loyal AT&T customers. Nope. What it does is prevent customers who got a steep discount on an iPhone a year ago in return for signing up for a two-year contract to get an equally steep discount this year for signing up for another two-year contract. Which strikes me as perfectly reasonable, given that this scenario involves you only being under contract to AT&T for a total of three years. You can still get a discount on a new iPhone–just not one that’s as steep as someone who commits to AT&T for a total of four years.

Come to think of it, the math is perfectly logical: You get a total of $400 in discounts (on one phone) for two years of commitment, $600 in discounts (on two phones) for three years of commitment, and $800 in discounts (on two phones) for four years of commitment. That’s a $200 discount per year of contract you fulfill.

(Why doesn’t AT&T let iPhone 3G owners get a $199 iPhone 3G S today in return for agreeing to fulfill their original two-year contract and extend it for an additional two years? I’m not sure. But I’m wary of long-term commitments to any wireless character, and therefore wouldn’t endorse a scenario which involves agreeing to marry AT&T until at least 2012 in order to get a discount on a phone.)

If there’s a problem here, it’s the way phones are usually sold in America, via subsidies that encourage us to think that phones cost less than they really do, and which tie us up with a carrier and prevent us from moving a phone we’ve bought to another carrier (even temporarily, when we’re overseas). A top-of-the-line iPhone really costs $699, which is not a crazy price given its capabilities; it’s just that very few of us ever pay that price or even realize it exists. We’re conditioned to think of those subsidized prices as the prices, in part because phone manufacturers and carriers stress them above all else.

So no, I’m not that sympathetic towards iPhone 3G owners who want AT&T to sell them the iPhone 3G S at the same sweetheart price as someone who didn’t buy an iPhone 3G last year. You agreed to fulfill a two-year contract with AT&T in return for the discount you got last year. AT&T is willing to renegotiate it and give you a proportionate discount on a 3G in return for another year of commitment. Explain to me again what’s offensive about that?

112 comments