Apple To Unveil iPod Cellphone Next Week?

Mictian writes "Apple Computer is planning to hold a major press conference next week (September 7th) in San Francisco and the rumours say that it will be the unveiling of a new iPod cellphone (NYT). The phone would incorporate the popular iTunes software, be built by Motorola and marketed by Cingular Wireless. The companies have declined to confirm or deny the report, which would fit Apple's past pattern of being secretive to maximise the splash on announcement day."

World turning upside down

[lawpoop]

Apple is releasing an iPod cell phone, while Nokia is releasing a tablet computer [nokia.com] with no cell phone capabilities.

Fantastic!

[adamwright]

Now I can watch movie clips, read news AND listen to music using my mobile phone. However, every second voice conversation will still run to the lines of "Hello? Hello? Can you hear me? Is this better? Yes? OK...wait, I've lost you. Can you hear me? CAN YOU? I'll call you back. I'LL CALL YOU BACK".

Fix your damned voice communications before you introduce more junk into handsets. I have a perfectly good MP3 player, but I still lack a useful phone!

Branding

[StacyWebb]

It's not really a matter of new technology, but rather a matter of branding. The Apple iTunes name sells. This behavior is being done by many corporations. Virgin started it along with 7-eleven. Next to appear on the scene is Disney Mobile (not making this up). Names sell, so individuals who are dedicated to Apple and it's products will most likley purchase this type of phone/service.

Not a terrible idea

[Gadgetfreak]

but I'm sure it won't fare nearly as well as the iPod itself. People get tired of their cell phones after a while. Especially when something new and flashy comes out.

Gadgets really shouldn't require contracts.

Not even...

[Poromenos1]

...if it had 40 GB capacity would I buy this. Then I would be stuck forever with this cellphone (which, for all I know, could be crappy) and I wouldn't buy a new one even if this got old because I would already have a half-decent cellphone I'd have to carry around with me because it's also my mp3 player.

Re:#1

[amichalo]

First, they sell Motorola phones, and Motorola partnered with Apple to build it.

I contend that Apple partnered with Cingular because they are the largest carrier in the US, now that they merged with AT&T, and because Cingular would allow Apple to sell a phone that didn't get it music by buying from an over priced Verizon music store. Sprint, Verizon, etc sell Motorola phones too (yeah, Sprint only sells CDMA Motos) but the GSM carriers will sell whatever they think is gonna bring in the customers.

Re:Fantastic!

[Anonymous Coward]

Can you hear me? CAN YOU? I'll call you back. I'LL CALL YOU BACK".
What is this? The 90's? Oh, I forgot, it's the US of A.

WiFi equipped iPod only way forward...

[Wonderkid]

1. There is all this speculation over a) A video iPod, yet sales of portable video devices have not taken off, unlike MP3 players before the iPod was first launched. b) An iTunes equipped phone. 2. Here are some things to think about: a) The cell phone / mobile phone networks are in a mess and not global, while WiFi is a global standard. b) The future lies in VoIP. c) The iPod OS contains an address book and a huge hard drive. Therefore, 3. An iPod with built in WiFi would be a global carrier free product and liberate people from the need to use a Mac or PC to purchase/download/sync their tunes and other data, they would simply login to the nearest WiFi network. Syncing with any Mac or PC would be wireless too which would be sweet. 4. Consider that a music playing PHONE is not original, the excellent Sony Ericsson K750i and K800 phones already do this well - and include well reviewed 2MP cameras too. (See http://www.fonebox.com/matrix [fonebox.com] ) 5. I vote for a wireless iPod as being what Apple SHOULD do, perhaps with a 2MP digicam on the back too.

Re:Yet more rumours

[Iriel]

True, I have a 60GB iPod and there's no way I'd switch to 100 songs from several thousand, however...

If Apple's getting anything out of this, they're hoping more people may buy this instead of a Shuffle. ::looks down at cracked screen::
"cuz like, I need a new phone anyway"

Re:Fantastic!

[ciroknight]

Hey! You forgot the camara. God I love that feature!</sarcasm>

I dunno if that's a camera or a camaro, but hey, I'll take my photo-taking, fast-moving, phone-calling machine any day. Now if only my phone had an electric razor..

Revolutionary

[mwvdlee]

I heard the new Apple product would be "revolutionary" and completely new, changing live as we know it and such... a mobile phone/iPod comination will NOT be that.

Not an iPod Phone

[Anonymous Coward]

All indications are that this is just a normal phone with a mobile version of iTunes. Installing iTunes on a Dell doesn't make it an iPod computer. Motorola industrial design, motorola software, motorola UI, Apple's iTunes.

Re:Not even...

[interiot]

"I won't buy that because it has features that I like too much."

Yeah, that makes perfect sense. No, it really does.

Consider...

[Captain Perspicuous]

Consider...

• the invitation said "1000 songs, here we go again", so it will probably have 4GB of memory
  
• Adding a 4GB harddisk will make the phone look fat (Nokia N91: 160 grams [infosyncworld.com])
  
• Apple is rumored to buy up large quantities of RAM [slashdot.org]
  

...I think it's clear what we will see: a mobile phone with 4GB of integrated memory... drool! :-)

Typical rumour reporting

[GauteL]

"The companies have declined to confirm or deny the report, which would fit Apple's past pattern of being secretive to maximise the splash on announcement day."

It also fits with there being nothing in the rumour. I'm not saying it is is definitely false, but people should remember that there have always been massive amounts of rumours concerning new Apple products, and most of these end up being false.

The only way of remaining secretive is to refuse to comment on any rumours, whether they are true or not.

Re:World turning upside down

[daniil]

I've heard rumours about old Nokia-branded computers, but I've never seen one myself. I have, however, seen numerous Nokia computer screens (and TV-s) around. So, Nokia producing things other than cellphones is not really a miracle.

Re:Fantastic!

[vonwilkenstein]

The handset is 50% of the network. If you use the free/cheapo phone that comes with a plan, your call quality will reflect it. The RAZR is a good phone because it contains a good transciever. All too often I see people balk at paying $200 for a good wireless handset and then complain that their service sucks. It makes a difference.

I have a friend that claims he "should not have to buy a phone because he is buying the service". I lagh (intentional poor spelling for the nazi's) and ask him what model TV he got when he sighend up for CATV, or what kind of PC did he get for subscribing to AOL.

As for the parent's comment that providers should improve the network, Wireless telephony is one of the most capital intensive industries. There would be blanket coverage if everyone was willing to pay $300/month. Also, blame your local government officials and zoning boards that deny zoning variances and permits to build cell sites where they are needed.

Re:Fantastic!

[huckleup]

but while it's true that the US is (37 times) bigger than the UK, so is the population, and therefore the opportunity for investment

I think the logistics just don't scale so easily. I think many people outside of the US think of it as just another country, but it is really almost like 50 different countries with different cultures, demographics, geographies, laws etc. Even more when you consider the differences between say Northern/Central/Southern California.

For instance I live in Central California which is full of mountains and gulches and such. Even in Silicon Valley, which you would think would be an obvious focus area, there are stretches of open grazing ranges and rolling hills in between the clusters of activity. So just driving 20 minutes from San Jose to Palo Alto I can't guarantee I'll get a connection. I generally don't have coverage problems in any 'downtown' areas, just in areas where one could see there might be difficulties.

As far as coverage in the rural parts of the country, I can't imagine how companies could justify cell towers in places where the population density is low. Just as a reference, compare the overall population density of the UK versus US:

UK: 244.7 people per sq. km
US: 29.7 people per sq. km

and then you compare the individual states:

New Jersey: 438.00 people per sq. km
California: 83.85 people per sq. km
Wyoming: 1.96 people per sq. km.

So it makes sense that the providers will focus on local solutions and there will be lots of dead spots in between. Quite the challenge, I'd say.

Re:LiPhone

[Doc Ruby]

Yeah, an integrated iPod and mobile phone, from a new partnership between Apple and Motorola. Whose previous partnership brought us trivial platforms like "the Macintosh". For some value of "trivial" that approaches "momentous". Anonymous miniscule Coward.