What is your point?

I was just trying to clear up some misinformation in this post: @Kim98:

Phone subsidies, in the US at least, do not involve a direct increase in the price of the plan. Plain and simple. There may be a slight increase in all plans as an indirect result of subsidies, but it certainly not a loan-type setup as kim98 has claimed is the case in Europe.

Carriers offer subsidies to increase their customer base, plain and simple. For example, ATT doesn't say, "hey, let's increase our prices for everyone to make more money and and then we can offer new customers cool phones for less money." It is probably more like this, "hey, let's offer this really hot phone on our network for a cheap price in order to get millions of new people signed up and giving us money for at least two years." They will take a financial hit initially, but will eventually reap the benefits because they have millions of new customers tied to their service for at least two years (BTW, I haven't seen ATT, or other major carriers, increase their voice plans for at least a few years).

I think the people in Europe who are paying the subsidized price of 1 Euro, or whatever, are the ones getting ripped off for paying extra each month. In America, not only do I get a discounted phone, but I get the same exact rate as the person who paid 2-3 times as much as me for their device.

I'm sure Steve Balmer uses an iPhone. Even if he has to go to some secluded dark cave so no one will see him.

So using a competitors product = defeat, right? Even if you don't make a device/software that directly competes with yours?

Buying a subsidized phone in the US is the way to go. And there are not specific cases where a carrier charges more for the same plan because you bought subsidized. This goes for all of the major US carriers. Verizon ATT, Sprint Tmobile, etc. all have static prices on their services. Like I said, unlimited 3G data on ATT is $30 no matter if you have an iPhone or other smart phone, subsidized or not. Carriers provide phone subsidies to get you on their network for two years, not so they can jack their prices up on you.

ATT didn't necessarily raise their rates on the iPhone data plan. They are offering 3G data instead of edge which is more than twice as fast. Would you expect to go to a car dealer and buy a car that is twice as fast as another for the same price? No.

Also, I don't think you understand the concept of subsidizing phones. The process you are referring to would apply to a car loan or mortgage where you pay a small percentage up front and then slowly pay off your balance each month (That is not a subsidy at all, but rather a loan). In the US, Carriers subsidize phones not so they can charge you more per month, but instead so they can get you to sign a two year contract. Over the course of two years, they will have made enough money off of you to more than cover the subsidy and make a handsome profit. This also helps with customer retention, which is being focused on by all carriers because the market is becoming saturated.

If I bought an E71, unsubsidized, it would cost me just as much on ATT as my iPhone with the same exact plan. $39 for 450 minutes, $30 for unlimited data, and $5 for 200 SMS for a total of about $75 per month.

"You can't seriously argue that the iPhone costs 1 euro just because there exists a plan where the up-front fee is 1 euro. It's equally ridiculous to argue it's 199 USD when in reality it's about 1000 USD."

The iPhone is $199 in the US. Plain and simple. It doesn't require a higher monthly bill than those who purchased full priced smart phones, only a contract.

That's fine if subsidies and carriers work different in Europe, but that's not how it is here, so I guess I'm not sure what you're trying to prove. It seem you just have some sort of relentless hate for the iPhone.

BTW, the article you referenced was quite favorable towards the iPhone 3G. Sure, it ends up being $160 more than the orginal iPhone over the course of two years (about $6 more per month), but the new iPhone runs on 3G, not edge. An Edge data plan for any ATT phone is always going to be lower than a 3G plan. (see car analogy above). Also, the article points out that the iPhone 3G price is very competitive and the overall cost of ownership is lower than some of its competitors.

Who needs explorer, firefox, or even safari? Doesn't anyone get those AOL CDs in the mail anymore?

I guess I am a little confused with what you are trying to say. I understand subsidies and how they work. But, You need to consider that with any phone, subsidized or not, you need to have a monthly plan with a carrier. Carriers offer subsidies on phones because it requires a contract which will generate more than enough revenue to cover the cost of the subsidy and make a profit over the term of the contract. With unsubsidized devices, they are not guaranteed that revenue.

The subsidized price of the phone is not directly charged to you every month, and the same plans are offered to customers with both subsidized and unsubsidized phones, at least here in the US. For example, If I bought an unsubsidized smart phone, and wanted to use it on ATT, an unlimited data plan will cost me $30 per month with text messaging being extra. That is the same as the iPhone, or any other phone that can be used on their network with a subsidy. If you buy a full price phone, you don't get a lower priced plan, only the choice of which carrier you use it on, and sometimes you don't even have a choice of carrier. For example, ATT announced they would offer the iPhone at an unsubsidized price of $600, which won't require a contract, but you are still going to pay the same for your plan and you still have to use ATT, unless you unlock it.

So, it seems to me that buying a subsidized phone is a much better option because you are still going to spend the same on your phone plan each month, and the initial cost will be much lower. The only exceptions I can see would be if you wanted to use on a specific carrier that doesn't offer the subsidized price, or if you don't want to be tied into a contract for two years. But if your going to have a cell phone for the next two years anyway, why in the hell would signing a contract be such a big deal? If you move out of their service area, you can get out of a contract sans-termination fee. I suppose if you were only planning on having a cell phone for the next year, or wanted to have bi-monthly service, which would actually be much more expensive than continuous service because you have to pay connection/disconnection fees.

"To clarify, we are indeed talking about the US version of the E71, aka E71 NAM aka E71-2, with AT&T-compatible dual band WCDMA (850/1900MHz)."

??

On desktop applications only (Mail and iCal etc).

I've tested a few times, and they are usually pushed through in seconds to my iPhone and in the web apps.

I wish they would have some different plans available for the iPhone. For example, you could choose to use edge only (for people outside of 3G area), have tethering as an option, have unlimited data as an option instead of a requirement (I don't want to pay $35 per month for 3G when I have free wifi 95% of the time). Maybe have some more options with voice plans (I think it goes from 450 to 900). etc etc etc.

I think ATT is just milking this exclusive deal with Apple while they can. As soon as other carriers offer the iPhone, I think we'll see a lot more competitive pricing and options with data. Maybe we'll see a CDMA iPhone in a few more years?

Great Job!

Dude, I never said that "all music made with computers sucks." Of course musically talented people with great software are going to make great music, but my point was that people with no understanding of music with great software can also make music. Of course it's not going to be as good, but like I said previously it makes for a lot of idiots sitting down in front of a computer (or in this case the iPhone) and making music, and subsequently ending up impressing some idiot at a record company who is more concerned with album sales than the integrity of their label. Think about it. It's not too hard to see how a talentless (yet physically attractive) individual could make a song, get signed by some huge record company, who in turn pays radio stations to play said shitty song, and millions of people with no taste in music are spoon fed this song, and go buy it on iTunes. (Think Britney Spears or Backstreet Boys).

That doesn't make them good or talented at what they do. Anyone can can pick a drum beat and overdub something else they didn't create, and then have some pretty girl sing some lyrics to it (which will be lip sung when performed live). The same thing applies to all genres. There is a lot of shit out there, but it is especially true with this genre. Not everyone can just pick up a guitar, learn a few chords in a minute and then sing over it. But, even the most musically challenged individual could sit down with this app and make "music." You only need to know the software you are using, rather than music itself. Those who have an understanding of both, are certainly going to be much better.

I think I've already used a couple analogies on here, but here's another. It is like graphic design in many ways. Someone who does not understand the elements of design (color balance, etc.) could easily learn a program like Photoshop or inDesign, but their layouts are not going to look as good as someone who has a complete understanding of both design and the software they are using.

Remote wipe would be useful, but I would rather know where it is.

@Noobs-R-Us:

UPS could come up with some system I'm sure. Like having a removable sticker of some sort with the chip in it. Then they could just remove them when the package is delivered and bring back to UPS for re-use.

Yeah, but couldn't they re-use the GPS chips for other deliveries? They could charge an extra dollar or two to add live tracking, but use the chip hundreds of times in order to pay for and make a profit off of it.

Or what about a web site you could go to to track your lost/stolen iPhone? Is this possible through Twinkle in any way, i.e. checking on a friends iPhone?

Good idea! Also, I think it would be neat to be able to buy GPS chips and be able to place them on anything you wanted to track (cars, animals, people, etc.)

How cool would that be?

I'm in your boat. No Twitter friends. And I agree that this is kinda creepy, but I suppose there are those who will use it a lot. I probably would if I had any friends on Twitter, especially stalker psycho friends.

Cool app though. Probably the best app at taking advantage of the GPS/location software.

It's more Apple's concern. They don't want their customers batteries to be dead after using the thing for two hours or less. If that functionality is really that important to you, go buy a phone with that capabilty. If it were that important, you/your wife would have researched the phone prior to purchasing it.

The capability is not there for a reason. (battery issues, security issues, maybe they're lazy, who knows). Regardless, at this point it is senseless for most people, and only a few complain about it. The battery already gets bad reviews for performing poorly with the new 3G chip, imagine how much worse the reviews would be with A2DP? You're looking at getting a couple of hours of battery life while using bluetooth, 3G, GPS, games, etc. For now, this functionality is pointless for most. Like it or not, that's how it is.

And you're post wasn't very constructive btw.

Also, my buddy's car has bluetooth, and he uses his iPhone with it all the time to make and receive calls.

Now that I read it again, I can see how someone could mistake that.

Using Bluetooth to listen to your iPhone in the car is still gonna drain your battery fast. Also, if you're in your car and your using a battery draining feature to listen to music, wouldn't you want to plug it in to a power source while its around? And if your gonna plug it in anyway, what the hell is the point of draining your battery with bluetooth???

Also, Bluetooth support is available for making and receiving calls. Are you saying that the particular head unit your wife has is not compatible? I take and reseive calls through my stereo in my car. I simply connect through an aux input on trhe head unit, and when someone calls my music fades out and my call picks up.

I really wasn't be facetious in that first post.

I imagine we will see a lot more of this (mainly because of the extra battery drain from people using 3G, GPS, and graphics intensive games from the app store). Who needs a removable battery, right? (I haven't had a problem with my battery yet. In fact, I've never been stuck with a dead phone.

Now, when traveling it might be smart to have something like this (I would prefer the one posted by itchytooth), in order to get the most out my device. And like I said before, there are definite advantages to having an external battery pack (charge both at same time, aesthetics, etc.)

If you listened to music on your BT headset all day, besides looking like a douche bag, you would also have the annoyance of swapping out your battery 3-4 times everyday.

"Hey, everyone, look how cool I am listening to my music without wires. What? Oh that huge bulge in my pocket? That's from the 4 extra batteries that I have to carry around with me all day so I don't have to use ugly wires to listen to my music."

Last time I checked, I owned an iPhone. Yep, still do.

"not everyone ranks "removable battery" as their #1 must-have feature."

Either do I. I actually prefer to have a non-removable battery as it does not compromise the design, and I've never replaced a battery in any phone I've ever owned. I wasn't being facetious in that first post btw, not sure why you took it that way?

Yeah, that seems better than having a replaceable battery.

My favorite part is that you can "snap the battery and iPhone together, and charge them both with the included charger."

Well said.

You have to arrange the notes on a piano (or any instrument) into a melody/rhythm using your understanding of music.

Picking between a gazillion samples is like picking out the color of paint for your living room. I don't need to know anything about paint to do it. I'll admit that people with an eye for color schemes etc. might do a better job of picking a color to compliment your furniture, curtains, etc. but that knack is not required.

Exactly. Where picking a pre-recorded or computer generated loop from a list and then applying various layers of other things they didn't create over it only requires knowledge of whatever software they are using rather than knowledge of music itself.

It's not much different than people creating custom myspace layouts. Just because someone uses a really intriguing piece of art as their background doesn't mean they are an artist. However, if they created the art, it is a different story.

10,000 dpi?!?! Most magazines print at 300 dpi.

@forrestcook:

touche, but thats still a whole lotta pixels.

I was referring to production software rather than instrumental software. Of course playing a musical instrument requires talent, on a computer or not. I'm talking about the idiots who don't know the first thing about music, open a program like garageband, pick a beat and pull in some samples overdubbed with them say "what, what" over and over again and calling it music.

"But computers and electronic instruments, in the end, are tools for creating music the same as a saxophone or piano or guitar"

In some regards you are absolutely correct. Playing a virtual piano on a computer is no different than playing an actual piano. That applies to most computer based instruments. Musically savvy individuals will sound good on both. However, in the world of mixing beats with samples, no music knowledge is required. Pick a beat, pick a sample, throw on some words about how cool you are, there's your song. It is absolutely ridiculous. How many mainstream hip-hop shows feature an actual drummer??? How many of the samples you hear during a live show aren't live at all, and were probably recorded by someone else? You might as well go to a Britney Spears concert.

Maybe, but I think it will have the opposite effect. What is the point of learning drums if all you need to do is pick a beat from a list?