digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Apple iPhone: more secrets revealed; Mini iPhone and 3rd Party Applications

tech.co.uk — ...It also looks like the iPhone that's set to launch stateside next month won't be the only mobile from the company. Apple has made an application ( number 0070103454 ) to the US Patent & Trademark Office. It reveals a smaller iPhone, this time with a display on both sides of the device

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Alex76, on 10/11/2007, -33/+7Lol. Simply interesting. 3rd Party Apps? So it's going to run an OS that is easy to tweak?
    • Tunguska, on 10/11/2007, -41/+7Sounds like a bit of an iGimmick to me.
    • johnpaul191, on 10/11/2007, -9/+92@bnoxiousasshole

      and homophobes are the new racists... hey! that's you!
    • bsolidgold, on 10/11/2007, -5/+39So... guys who dress nice and can afford the latest in technology are metro?

      How about: you're just poor and can't get a date?
    • ilgaz, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3If you want tweaking and real 3rd party apps including open source and Java go for Symbian or WinCE running real smart phones.

      Or, if you want no limits, go for that Linux phone which will ship in months.

    • monospaced, on 10/11/2007, -10/+2that kinda is the definition of metro
    • PathDaemon, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3@monospaced: Take a step back from the internet. Watch some TV — you can see the people there! You'll realize the difference.
    • sockpuppets, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3bnoxiousasshole, blocked for your name alone.
  • skewh, on 10/11/2007, -1/+65This looks like the same patent illustration that was supposed to be the next generation of multi-touch enabled iPods.
    • PatrickA, on 10/11/2007, -6/+26Yes, this patent makes no mention specific mention of a phone. The iPhone is quite small enough and there is no reason for Apple to try and make an even smaller one.
    • Bejron, on 10/11/2007, -4/+28Have to agree with that, hardly think they will do a iPhone Mini.. This article smells like bs to me..
    • Aliarse, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3@skewh (#6643425)
      Didn't people say the same thing about the iPod?
    • Mootabolife, on 10/11/2007, -9/+22The iphone isn't all that small..
    • johnpaul191, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1before the official announcement, there were rumors that there were two iPhones. one of them was smaller in the more standard phone format. *if* Apple is planning a more standard version of the iPhone, it would make sense to release the flagship model first. the smaller one would surely drop some features, but would still be a phone that should sync nicely with OS X. i would be interested in that.
    • CreativeGuy, on 10/11/2007, -4/+13iPod... iPhone... same thing.

      I would love a smaller iPhone that doesn't have the iPod features in it. Use the space for a larger battery with longer life - or make it removable.
    • rpgmaker, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2I would love a smaller iPhone that doesn't have all those features that I will never use but keep the iPod features.
    • Gigabutt, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9making electronic gadgets smaller? who saw that coming?
    • aardvarkfarm, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Must agree with CreativeGuy. It would make more sense for a business standpoint as well.

      The iPhone is not cheap. Its early adopters are likely to be Mac users to begin with--getting a new phone can be confusing enough without having to learn an new computer OS on top of it. And does anyone know any Mac users who don't have an iPod already? For a while there--not sure if they still are, but it was a longrunning promotion--you got a Nano when you bought a Mac. Most of the people I know who got one that way ALREADY had an iPod.

      Yes, it might cut down on gadgets to carry around, but a) iPod users are already carrying a separate iPod and phone and b) someone with a 40 GB iPod is probably not going to leave it at home in favor of their 8 GB phone.

      So, Apple, cut your customers a break. Unless this is something that's going to come out to rave reviews and do magical things no phone has ever done before, like laundry and toast, just give us a less pricey phone with the other cool gadgets and let us keep our iPods.
  • drathosX3, on 10/11/2007, -26/+20I want the Microsoft oFone.
    • Optimaximal, on 10/11/2007, -9/+41don't you mean the Microsoft Fune?

      Features include the ability to allow you to share contacts with nearby users, but they disappear from the phonebook after three dial attempts.
    • raptordrew, on 10/11/2007, -15/+6no, he's definitely talking about the oFone, check engadget for the video
    • b3mus3d, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4seriously, you really should realise that "Features include the ability to allow you to share contacts with nearby users, but they disappear from the phonebook after three dial attempts." means it's a joke.
  • mechanisma22, on 10/11/2007, -1/+293rd party development is what I'm leaning on to buy the iPhone, Apple will shoot itself in the foot if they don't. They might add 3rd party development through widgets. I hope they can get AIM but without the crazy data fees
    • fuzzmeister, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7My guess is that they will allow 3rd party widgets, which will run in a somewhat contained environment. This will probably limit their functionality, but also keep them from crashing the phone.
    • ilgaz, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4There is not a single phone on planet "crashed" because of a third party application. Java or Symbian doesn't matter.

      It is called "protected operating system", exists since first OS/2, Linux and NT 4.0 later.

      Don't fall to Apple tricks to lock you from independent software.
    • ilgaz, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1I am afraid there are people who would buy that kind of stuff if shipped by Apple.
    • PathDaemon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Hey, the tv has a closed OS, and people got around it immediately. We can only hope that Apple doesn't fix that or that they wise up about the users.
    • roxics, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I think the whole limitation of 3rd party development is all about AT&T not wanting skype clients or free text message software on the iPhone, and they're worried that if they open up a development platform that's exactly what people will build. I don't think Apple really cares, they just want to sell the hardware and future software. Does Apple even make a cut of the service contracts? But Apple is forced to do this to protect their carriers investment in the project.

      I think if Wi-Fi was as widespread as cell networks are, Apple would be selling the iphone as a wi-fi phone only and letting anyone develop for it without hesitation.
  • suprememilo, on 10/11/2007, -4/+15aren't there already devices with screens on both sides, and aren't those devices stupid?
    • joecritch, on 10/11/2007, -10/+2But we all thought touch screens were stupid.... until now.
    • pinsomniac, on 10/11/2007, -6/+9Yes. Samsung and Sprint just launched a phone called the "Upstage," and, well... that phone is an abomination. There's absolutely no reason that a phone would require screens on both sides. This *especially* applies to Apple if they plan on pursuing their goal of having a simple revolutionary smartphone UI. If Apple wants truly wants to win market share, they don't need to introduce more gimmicks.

      Anyone remember what the best/fastest-selling iPods of their respective times? Those would be the mini/nano/2G shuffle. It succeeded not only due to the strong brand, but because of its value and overall low price. In contrast, the 1G iPhone is a piece of art that consumers can't afford and businesses find impractical.

      Most would like to see Apple get rid of carrier exclusivity, but it's never stopped a product before. (See: Danger Hiptop/Sidekick) If the news is true and they're already working on a miniature version, good for them. They're certainly on the right track.

      Shrink it down and lower the MSRP. Do that, and even I might find myself a customer.
    • Bandito, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18Fantastic! I was hoping they'd make an iPhone Shuffle.
      - No Display
      - Calls you make go to random people in your address book.

      :)
  • jmz635, on 10/11/2007, -6/+2Something like the Samsung F300?

    http://crave.cnet.co.uk/mobiles/0,39029453,49286848,00.htm
  • swearitagain, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3Such news only pave the way for iPhone's great success
  • ilovethissite, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1Has apple mentioned the suggested retail price of the iPhone yet? $499? $599 I'm guessing this would be the way to go if you don't currently own a cell phone, a digital camera, and a ipod but always wanted one so now you can have it all in one, iPhone.

    Who is the dominant company in the portable market right now, is it Palm's Treo brand?
    • geminitojanus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Nokia is the market monster when it comes to phones.
    • superalamar, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1iphone price conjecture will get you nowhere.... nobody knows what it will cost.
  • emit, on 10/11/2007, -5/+136I've heard rumours of iPhone shuffle. You push a button, and it dials a random number.
  • ibic, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5i believe that this patent is for next-gen iPod, not for the coming iPhone.
  • gincarnated, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9If I can use VLC on the iPhone i'm sold.
    • soccerboi00, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7MPlayer is much better and more optimized.
    • archer75, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2All I want is reader software that supports multiple formats for my ebooks and i'm sold.
    • drouk1556, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I just want to make phone calls.
  • thebairyhum, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1What's so diggable about this article? It starts off with

    qq{The decision is something Apple "is wrestling with," said company CEO Steve Jobs.}

    Then it's followed up with another apple patent that we can all speculate about. Haven't we been through this enough of times or is it the classic case of
    if ($article->title =~ /iphone/i) { $idiot->digg; }
    ?

    btw looking forward to some development on the iphone :)
  • christor, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9The patent does not describe a device with screens on both sides. Rather, it's for a device with a screen on the front and a force-sensitive back. Instead of touching elements on the screen with your greasy fingers, like you do on the iPhone, you touch the back of the device - and the cursor shows up on the display on the front in that location. Think of it like a piece of glass where your fingers are behind but you see them in the front. Seems like a decent idea, but I think typing on it would work all that well. However, this may be a great idea for the iPod where precise relative clicking is not as critical.
  • judicar, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I wouldn't read too much into this, it's well known that Apple and other tech companies use patents for disinformation to keep competition off balance. Not saying that's a bad thing.
    • johnpaul191, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5it's also possible that Apple will never use this for a product. i'm sure they tried a ton of interfaces before settling on one. as an engineering student i was taught that when you are faced with a complicated problem you find at least three solutions and then pick the best. running with the first solution is the you think of is the worst thing you can do. that's why companies like Apple have tons of crazy designs in their labs that will never be used for an actual product. that's also why they get such credit for their well thought out designs. basically, they are not lazy.
  • aynrandom, on 10/11/2007, -13/+2god you guys are such geeks
  • nycmac247, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2universal remote and not iPhone?
  • carllewis, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11Don't any of you people get it? An iPhone mini makes perfect sense. Because most consumers can't afford a $500-600 device, Apple will release a smaller, probably phone and internet functionality only device that will retail for more like $200-400.
    • adethier, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Glad someone said something ;)
    • Archimboldo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@carllewis

      It kinda makes sense. Having a cheaper version that tends more toward the mass market can actually help feed the snob market. The snobs can then say, "Ha! My gadget is better than yours! See how great I am? I stand out from the crowd!" Kind of like saying to the Corolla owner, "Ha! I've got a Lexus!"
  • SuperRoach, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6What about Creatives Zen StonePhone?

    It calls someone up but cuts out before the other person picks up due to its crappy media center software.
  • tuxracer, on 10/11/2007, -0/+12lol I love this part:

    "...the decision to delay the launch of Leopard, the next version of Apple's Mac OS X operating system was a good one. The company said its work on the iPhone had stretched its limited resources - and that it was talent, not just money, that helped it develop great products.

    'I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a cheque,' Jobs said. 'If so, then Microsoft would have great products,' Steve Jobs said."
    • Ramble, on 10/11/2007, -5/+8Said the man who has what? 5% of the market?
    • alakev, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10but 100% of our hearts...
      /g
    • KielKilla, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1Holy *****... what a ***** dick.
    • G5Unit91, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3ramble,

      thats more then you have

      But really, the iPhone feels like a Zune right now, so much potential, yet there's just that one.missing.thing.
    • stalefries, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2"that one.missing.thing."

      You mean, the iPhone itself?
  • Damienk, on 10/11/2007, -0/+15Hahaha as quoted from the article:

    "I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a cheque," Jobs said. "If so, then Microsoft would have great products," Steve Jobs said.
  • soonlar, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2maybe we could see an iPhone mini in our future to address the size.
  • MightyMack, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4"A few of us have been using the iPhone a lot and if you wanted it back, you would have to pry it from our dead hands," he said.
    • surfing, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3This make it sound like they don't have a lot of prototypes. If they are shipping this product to the public next month, they should all be using the product all the time now.
  • aaronsca, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5http://duggmirror.com/apple/Apple_iPhone_more_secrets_revealed_Mini_iPhone_and_3rd_Party_Applications/

    DuggMirror links should be automagic when stories make it to the front page.
  • rtmag, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9@emit,

    A joke image on the iPhone shuffle can be found here:
    http://www.mac-essentials.de/bilder2007/iphone-shuffle.jpg
  • jcelgin, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1"I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a cheque," Jobs said. "If so, then Microsoft would have great products," Steve Jobs said.
  • yuhoga, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Re: Said the man who has what? 5% of the market?

    True. MS has everything to lose, Apple, everything to gain.
    • KielKilla, on 10/11/2007, -3/+0I'm sorry did you miss story book time?
  • bimtott, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1As with every Apple patent application we've seen, this is sure to...nay, GUARANTEED to turn into an actual product. The USPTO Oracle commands it!
  • Emery, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1edit: deleted due to a mistake
  • antdude, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3http://duggmirror.com/apple/Apple_iPhone_more_secrets_revealed_Mini_iPhone_and_3rd_Party_Applications/
  • marceline407, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1christor's got it right. the patent doesn't involve 2 screens, but rather a screen on the front and a touch sensitive area on the back.
  • InsultComedy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1I'll buy it when it drops to $200 and when it's supported by other carriers. The RAZR debuted at $800 and now you can get one for $150.

    Seriously, the iPhone probably costs them $50 to make.
  • roo183, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0http://xfgd.info
  • Rinswind, on 05/04/2008, -0/+0Such news only pave the way for iPhone's great success
    see on my logg
    http://ratamterra.net/
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.