Talk:IPhone/Archive 6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents 1 Price cut complaints 2 Hotmail Compatible? 3 Insurance 4 Announcement in the next 48 hours 5 Germany 6 Details of all price plans appriopriate for inclusion? 7 Doesn't Make Sense 8 Typo to be fixed 9 iCal, Notes, adressbook????? 10 iphone in middle east 11 United Kingdom 12 iphone in south east asia 13 Introductory pargraph priority 14 Disambiguation page? 15 The SIM unlock section 16 AT&T EDGE 17 Firewall nonsense 18 Here's an idea... 19 contents section 20 iPhone Photo 21 Mention about third party apps being shut down? 22 iPhone in Australia 23 Criticism section? 24 Getting comments from the community 25 Split needed 26 3rd Party Apps 27 Specification sheet 28 Invention of the Year 29 How many edits has this article got? 30 iPhone article needs to mention flaws 31 Minor English correction needed 32 iPhone image... Again 32.1 Yet again… 33 Using a Quarter for size comparison is US-centric 34 SDK announcement/availability? 35 News 36 Pricing Info? 37 iPhone Software Updates 38 Specifications 39 OS X != Mac OS X 40 Use of flags 41 Battery 42 Typo 43 My take on criticism

Price cut complaints

Putting this in the article would probably violate NPOV, but I figured I'd put it here for food for thought for those interested. Bill Maher on his show yesterday: "New rule: Stop bitching because Apple cut the price of the iPhone. 'Early adopters' always pay a premium, early adopters being a business term for dipshits who stand in line for six hours for a freaking phone. It's not a price cut, it's a repeal on the nerd tax." FWIW. Nualran 18:25, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

It wouldn't violate NPOV if it's clearly stated that it was an opinion put forth by a celebrity, but I don't think it's notable enough for inclusion. The iPhone has been a fairly hot topic in the media even before its release and there are likely countless quotes you could include, but I don't think we need to clutter the article any further with them. -- Atamasama 15:48, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Hotmail Compatible?

Is the iPhone compatible with Hotmail email users? So far, the ads say GMail, Yahoo and even AOL; however, they never menton Hotmail. 72.200.29.102 03:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Out of the box, no. Googling around, there are some work-arounds, such as installing a plug-in or using third-party middleware. Groink 05:57, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, anymore comments greatly appreciated137.30.117.5 18:48, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Insurance

Dwashin6 17:06, 15 September 2007 (UTC)The iphone service providers originally did not offer insurance to its customers, however since the iphone has been out for a few months, this feature is now available.

I moved Dwashin6's comment to the bottom of the page in a new topic, it was at the top of the page before, just FYI. -- Atamasama 15:51, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Announcement in the next 48 hours

Apple is going to announce it's European partners in the next 48 hours. --84.178.77.9 16:22, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Did you mean "72 hours"? (UK on the 18th, Germany on the 19th, France on the 20th.) In any case, as one might have reasonably expected, the information about those countries was added as the information became available; one needn't worry about reminding people about that. Guy Harris 21:00, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Germany

The iPhone will be available in Germany on November 9 with Tmobile http://www.apple.com/de/iphone/ Could this be added? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mvjs (talk • contribs) 12:10, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Somebody did. (You could have been that somebody....) It was pretty much inevitable that somebody would do so shortly after the announcement. Guy Harris 18:51, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Details of all price plans appriopriate for inclusion?

Currently, the full details for all AT&Ts price plans are shown in the article. To my eye, they seem a little inappropriate for the iPhone article, but I'd like to hear some other thoughts about them. - Davandron | Talk 13:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Bad Idea begone -- KelleyCook 15:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't Make Sense

Just a small mistake in the 'missing features section it says 'SMS to one than one person (CC or BCC)'. Someone should fix that up ;) 125.168.3.21 12:44, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. - Davandron | Talk 13:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Fixed even better my again nuking that section the dude from Iran has put in three times against consensus and manual of style. -- KelleyCook 15:35, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I took the initiative and wiped out the missing features section. But, I also made sure that the information in that section was located elsewhere in that article. Half of it already was (another reason why that section had to go) but what I couldn't find elsewhere I added. In the future if someone tries to put that section back again (or a "criticisms" section) we'll be sure to delete it. The article is done very nicely right now with criticisms and missing features being included within the body of the article to contrast all of the included features of the device, and as KelleyCook already mentioned the consensus has been to do it that way. -- Atamasama 16:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Typo to be fixed

"...3G continues to be expanded to most major citiies in the US..." -- two "i"s in 'cities.' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.192.104.10 (talk) 03:36, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Typo fixed. Thanks for the heads up. EVula // talk // ☯ // 03:49, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

iCal, Notes, adressbook?????

Could somebody owning an iPhone (or otherwise having practical experience) PLEASE write a section on the functinonality of the above programs?? That is still missing. Thyl 213.70.217.172 10:44, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Could you clarify exactly what sort of information you'd like to see? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you, but it sounds like you might be wanting more of a review than an encyclopedia article. —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 01:48, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

iphone in middle east

can any one tell me when the iphone will be available in middle east ? 196.218.52.188 01:45, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

No one could tell you that, as it hasn't been announced by Apple or any carriers. And, to be perfectly honest, I don't think you'll be seeing an official iPhone anytime in the near future. —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 01:50, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

United Kingdom

No need to wait for iPhone release here. Pyrofer has posted a guide on how to turn your iPod Touch into a full 3G iPhone! http://digg.com/apple/Turn_your_iPod_Touch_or_iPhone_into_a_3G_iPhone_now_Step_by_Step_Guide

This section about iphone availability in UK fails to mention that the iphone will also be sold at o2 shops, just a bit of a heads up. Even though t-mobile should have got the contract!! lol Danfoster20 16:03, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

iphone in south east asia

is there anyone knows, date of iphone availability in south east asia next year ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.5.65.183 (talk) 17:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Introductory pargraph priority

The phone's lack of 3G network support has been a source of criticism.[4]

This should not be included in the introductory paragraph as this space should be used for describing the article in question and this statement does not carry much notability. It should be placed in a sub section labeled criticism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.9.54.58 (talk) 21:51, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely correct, per WP:Lead section. Someone invested in and currently editing this article should fix this. ask123 02:38, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Disambiguation page?

I know this has been discussed to death, but if we have more than on items with the same name, shouldn't a user be directed to a disambiguation page? 69.137.138.142 05:12, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it has been discussed to death, but here's the summary: No, two things sharing the same name doesn't automatically require a disambiguation page. Wikipedia's policy on disambiguation pages dictates that it should depend on what the average reader will be looking for; if it is ambiguous, then a disambiguation page is called for. I think there would be little debate that the majority of readers looking for an article on "iPhone" are looking for Apple's version rather than Cisco's. However, you'll notice a hatnote at the top of iPhone that points any readers potentially looking for that article to it. —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 05:23, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. 69.137.138.142 12:27, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

The SIM unlock section

This article at 75K is getting fairly large. I first plan to split off is the SIM unlock section as that particular section alone will eliminate any possibility for a GA nomination. The question is what should it be called. I'm thinking "iPhone unofficial extensions" with a redirect from "iPhone SIM unlock", but am open to other possibilities. -- KelleyCook 19:03, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

AT&T EDGE

Do you have to pay each time you use AT&T EDGE network? I heard you do thats why you should use wi- fi. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.103.164.86 (talk) 11:41, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

No. http://www.apple.com/iphone/easysetup/rateplans.html --Elvey 20:27, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Firewall nonsense

I'm considering removing the section: "Analysts also claim that iPhone lacks any type of firewall, which some experts claim is posing a data security risk.[36] It is not confirmed by Apple or by independent analysts that used the actual device for tests that it doesn't have a firewall. Daniel Eran writes: "Dulaney doesn't know if the iPhone has a firewall, has no reason to suggest that its installation of OS X wouldn't offer a firewall, and offers no reasons why a mobile device would need a firewall anyway."[37] I read it while looking for other iPhone info, and it's obvious (to me) misinformation that doesn't belong in an encyclopedic article. One analyst, who in the piece referenced also makes a demonstrably false statement that is evidence of extreme ignorance of the topic he's discussing (he claims that Exchange doesn't support POP or IMAP), is not 'analysts' or 'experts', and provides the only support for a statement that is nonsensical to anyone who understands the origin and purpose of firewalls, or who is at all familiar with the iPhone's OS. http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/Connecting_POP_And_IMAP_Clients_To_MS_Exchange_Server.html. Ken Dulaney appears to be either a shill for Microsoft, as Eran indicates, a grossly incompetent and unreliable source, or both. Perhaps the section could be revived in a criticism/demonization section. For the record, I'm not a fanboy; I don't like the iPhone - the lack of several critical features like OS access, A2DP, cut 'n paste, and a landscape keyboard kill it for me. (P.S. I see a shell is now available; I wonder if it turns out that ipfw or IP stack knobs like net.inet.icmp.icmplim exist!) --Elvey 21:13, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Here's an idea...

OS X section should be moved together into the same article as Mac OS X (the article should be renamed OS X) that way a link in both the touch and iPhone can lead to it, plus more room for explanation. Just an idea. TrevorLSciAct 23:01, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Disagree. If you're going to go that, make a subsection in the Mac OS X article for OS X. Butterfly0fdoom 19:59, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

contents section

usually the contents section is at the left, why is it at the right over here? very minor issue but i'm just curious as to why this page has a different look

Krishvanth 19:14, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmm no idea. Something must be wrong in the code. I'll try to fix it now. --Slarti (1992) 19:16, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

That source code is scary (at least the top part). Anyway, no luck trying to fix it since the contents don't appear in the code (I should have known). --Slarti (1992) 19:20, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Just above the Features section is the {{TOCnestright}} template... This abbreviates the table of contents so only the first two levels of headings are shown. I'm not sure how to make the template behave like a normal table of contents.... Paul^C/_T+ 04:01, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I've removed this this template. This is premature optimisation. If the TOC is too long, the best thing to dom would be to work on reducing the amount of unnecessary headers the article has. Chris Cunningham 08:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

iPhone Photo

I really don't like the iPhone photo... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.108.69.127 (talk) 04:28, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay, then find a better one that's can be legally used. Be bold! Cheers, ask123 14:11, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

And please find a real photo, not a digitally-produced mockup of what people wished an iPhone screen looked like (for example, the images of the iPhone on Apple's web site). -- Atamasama 15:49, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

My image was removed and replaced with no reasoning that I could find, so I'm going to upload it again. – ɜɿøɾɪɹℲ _{( тɐʟк • ¢ʘи†ʀ¡βs )} 15:55, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Oops, now I can't find it. I'll try and do this later. – ɜɿøɾɪɹℲ _{( тɐʟк • ¢ʘи†ʀ¡βs )} 16:03, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it should be a real photo, not a digitally-produced one. And, of course, only be bold if you have a free-to-use image that's better than the one that's currently there. The current image seems clear enough, but if you've got a better one, let's see it. ask123 16:04, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and which image, in particular, are you talking about? ask123 16:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

If someone can take a picture of their iPhone with the new 1.1.1 software and the iTunes Wi-Fi Music Store it would make the article better. Paul^C/_T+ 13:21, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I at least fixed the white balance on the existing photo. If I had an iPhone, I'd make a better free image. Anyone wanna buy me one? --Cody Pope 20:15, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Mention about third party apps being shut down?

There doesn't appear to be a mention in this article about how firmware update 1.1.1 disables all third party applications.

There is. (The firmware update relocks iPhones, and currently there is no method to unlock iPhones using v1.1.1.) --Elvey 21:13, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Locking refers to preventing the iPhone from having a provider other than the "official" provider being the home network; that has nothing whatsoever to do with third-party application support (turning your iPhone into a pedometer has nothing to do with making it use T-Mobile). Guy Harris 00:11, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

iPhone in Australia

The iPhone is avaliable in Australia now. Not in 2008. If i'm wrong, some one from australia please tell me. ~chloe~

There has been no apple announcement yet. Any iphones you get in Australia must be unlocked, and thus, illegal. ĞavinŤing 06:14, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Unlocked phones are not illegal, particularly in Australia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.113.102.66 (talk) 19:10, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I wish. A few people have brought ones off ebay and unlocked it but its not officially out yet. It's not even mentioned on apple's .au website. Rekija 02:54, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

There is the same situation in the UK right now. It has been out for ages now and tonnes of people have them. I did start a thread but someone deleted it for reasons unknown to me. This better not be deleted because I am concerned that this article has totally wrong information. ChaosSorcerer91 12:40, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Criticism section?

Why not move any & all criticisms that are sprinkled throughout the article and put them into a single criticisms section? --EvilMonkeySlayer 15:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

See WP:CRITICISM#Criticism_in_a_.22Criticism.22_section. —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 15:21, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Essentially, the answer is that having them throughout the article is better. A criticism section is only done when necessary, such as when people can't take the time to improve the article by including the criticisms in the main body of the article. That work has already been done in this article. -- Atamasama 16:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Getting comments from the community

Really recently, a report conducted by Green Peace and found toxic chemicals in iPhone. I added this information (with reference to The Washington Post) on the article and a member removed it stating "As Greenpeace's track history would indicate, I think we should wait and see what other researchers have to say about the matter before we start treating their word as fact."[1] I would like to see if this content is appropriate in Wikipedia or not, seeing that this member treats the information as WP:OR despite haveing a trusted source. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 15:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be okay to include the information as long as there is a disclaimer along the lines of this being not independently evaluated yet. I do think it's questionable whether or not Greenpeace is a reliable source in these matters. -- Atamasama 18:28, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I took another look at the article... To be honest it seems like fluff. No mention is made of the impact of these chemicals, what harm they'd cause, and whether or not this is unique to the iPhone. It says that Nokia phones don't have PVC (but doesn't mention BFR) and that Sony and Motorola have BFR-free products but not whether or not they have PVC and doesn't say which products (all, most, a few?). It only says that PVC and BFR are prohibited in Europe but children's toys, but that they are allowed in cell phones. No mention of prohibitions around the rest of the world. I'd say this isn't notable at all and doesn't belong in this article. -- Atamasama 23:00, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Split needed

We're at 71k. Something's gotta give. History of the iPhone is a no-brainer. Huge amount of detail in here, relatively self-contained, typical thing to split. Chris Cunningham 18:31, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Most of the size is due to the 130+ references in the article and images. If those are factored out there's only 38kb of readable text, which isn't overly large, and just outside WP:SIZE's guide. But if a section is to go, I'd rather see the features, pricing, and specifications sections split off as those are (for me) the least interesting and difficult to read part of the article. --Bobblehead ^(rants) 19:33, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

38k of prose is still more than most easily-readable articles have including images and refs. The features are difficult to split without making the sub-article look like an ad and I'd rather jettison pricing trivia entirely than maintain an article on it. History is deep, detailed, and really easy to section off, and if we punted it then moving the history stub-section further up the article (where it really belongs) might be more palatable. Chris Cunningham 00:46, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, those 130: references need to be consolidated, then. I'm sure the vast majority of them overlap. Butterfly0fdoom 22:52, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps the article should just be re-written. Having a whole article devoted to the "history" of a mobile phone that has been on sale for less than a year is probably going a little overboard. AlistairMcMillan 23:39, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

It's beyond overboard. It's because people over-zealously overload the section with too much detail. I think the history article should be gotten rid of, and the entire iPhone article should be written so it just covers the necessary information. Butterfly0fdoom 09:05, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Be WP:BOLD -- KelleyCook 16:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

The split section iPhone availability, sales, and pricing is now being considered for deletion. Paul^C/_T+ 15:54, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

3rd Party Apps

Apple will allow 3rd party applications on the iPhone. Steve Jobs announced this in an open letter on Apple's Hot News site. This is a dynamic page though so I hesitate to point to it as a reference for the news, we'll have to wait for it to show up again in a more permanent place. -- Atamasama 18:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

This is fantastic news. There's also no lacking for more easily linked-to sources... [2][3][4][5] EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:59, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Nice references, it looks like someone already added in the info about the announcement so I used your eWeek link. -- Atamasama 19:43, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

So where's the best place to add information about 3rd party applications developed for the iPhone? I see AOLserver has now been ported to the iPhone - this is pretty cool to my mind, although I don't know if it's the first application/web server to have done so. http://velocipeek.com/2007/09/17/iphone-aolserver-and-tcl-ports/ So can I add that to this page or is there a better one?--Brian Fenton 10:43, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

If the overall intent is to create a list of 3rd-party iPhone applications, I would actually create a separate article. In the process of developing such an article, it may be good to also make it generic enough so that it includes all devices that can use these apps, such as the iPod touch - as I've heard that the SDK and web apps will work with it as well. Groink 19:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Specification sheet

The iPhone is classified as a phone, so should it have a "Specification sheet" that is on every other phone wiki? - Synchronisis 04:23, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Can't see why not. Rekija 00:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Invention of the Year

"Time magazine has designated the iPhone as the invention of the year. Seems this bit of information should be integrated into the article somehow." says 198.88.216.101 at 03:10, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

How many edits has this article got?

?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.69.13.147 (talk) 10:53, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Who cares? WeBuriedOurSecretsInTheGarden 19:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

iPhone article needs to mention flaws

I find the iPhone article very informative but it appears to be written by Apple. There had been several reports on flaws and other shortcomings noticed by users, but none is mentioned here. Klavaza 04:00, 8 November 2007 (UTC)León Aguilera Radford

Give some links to these reports, if they are reliable resources and the flaws are notable then they will likely get added. Rekija 04:21, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. Most so-called "flaws" end up being personal point-of-views which is not allowed on Wikipedia. The cited flaws should be made by well-established reviewers/critics. Also, keep in mind that bugs are not actually flaws because they can be fixed tomorrow. Flaws are more like design-related issues or features that are left out. Please keep these ideas in mind. Groink 05:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Note also that there are some flaws mentioned. They're not all lumped together into a "Criticism" section; WP:Criticism#Formatting criticism suggests that criticism is at least sometimes best when distributed throughout the article, rather than isolated in such a section. Guy Harris 07:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

A lot of work was done by multiple editors to integrate the flaws of the device in with the body of the article in an encyclopedic manner. I suggest you read the entire article instead of skimming it for a flaws section. For example, the iPhone camera can't record video, where might that flaw be? In the part of the article talking about the camera. -- Atamasama 16:37, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Somebody just added in a Criticism section. I removed criticisms already mentioned in the appropriate parts of the article, and moved some to those parts when they weren't there already, and stuck in Template:criticism-section to encourage the movement of the rest of them. Guy Harris 20:18, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I admire your patience, but I just pulled it, primarily because it was completely unsourced. —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 20:54, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Minor English correction needed

From the "Intellectual property" section: "Since then, the I PHONE mark was abandoned." I'm guessing that this might have been added by someone whose first language isn't English, as correct usage of the word "since" seems to cause a lot of problems. Anyway, the correct version should be "Since then, the I PHONE mark has been abandoned." 86.136.251.18 23:33, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Make the edit. As Wikipedia policy says... To be bold and edit how you see fit. Groink 00:32, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

The article is semi-protected, so anonymous and new users are unable to. I have made the edit. —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 00:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

iPhone image... Again

The picture of the iPhone was again changed. This time it is claimed to be public domain, but again this looks like a fake picture. No iPhone screen looks like that exactly, it looks digitally manipulated like the images on Apple's web site. -- Atamasama 21:29, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm looking at this picture again, and the info given for it... I may have been hasty. It looks too good to be real, but it might just be a very, very good picture. I'll ask the person who added it. -- Atamasama 21:31, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Zoom the picture to maximum resolution and you will see that it can't be digitally manipulated picture, it looks pretty real...the most important prove is the edges of the screen and also inner silver edges of iPhone....Ausis 22:16, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I've totally changed my mind. It's a real image, just a very well-done one, kudos to the uploader. -- Atamasama 17:22, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Well the EXIF data says it was taken with a Nikon D80, not an iPhone, so the quality should be a little better :). Anyhow I think the fingerprint smudge (well known to iPhone users everywhere) over the weather icon belies the yet another staged mock-up theory. -- KelleyCook 15:17, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Yet again…

The new image just put up now is AWFUL! The color is not calibrated correctly. The device looks very used and doesn't present itself well. Very bad lighting. I prefer the darker image myself - as the previous image is more professionally done. Groink 23:30, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree. The previous one is a little dark, but it's better than Aidoo's which is far to bright.--HereToHelp 23:54, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, the current one is definitely too dark. I do admit mine is too bright, but I'm having issues with the computer I have photoshop on, so I can't fix that for now (I know other free programs can fix it, but I prefer to use Photoshop so I can tweak it more than just the basics.) Fix the current one, and I won't have an issue, but, at the risk of sounding like I'm just trying to have my own image used, I think too dark is worse than too bright. I'm not going to change the picture now, in the interest of avoiding an edit war, but I think it needs to be fixed soon. And please remain civil, or this discussion will turn into an non-constructive war of words. aido2002talkˑuserpage 00:45, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I just fixed the image. See the photo to the right. aido2002talkˑuserpage 00:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

The iPhone, really, is a giant touchscreen. I think the most important feature of any image that displays the iPhone is the clarity of the screen. The current image, while dark, shows off the screen very well. While your image is far from terrible the screen is not clear at all, and I'd very much prefer the image being displayed now. -- Atamasama 01:34, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Using a Quarter for size comparison is US-centric

Hi, I live in not-the-USA and I don't know how large a Quarter is. There is a picture depicting a Bluetooth Headset next to a Quarter. I suggest changing this so that the headset is next to a ruler or other Internationally recognised sizing paradigm. I would also suggest this be a rule in general for this sort of photo. Thanks. 82.12.156.55 16:39, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

In Japan, it is very common to use a pack of cigarettes to demonstrate size of an item - especially on Yahoo Japan auctions. If you do use a ruler to demonstrate size, make sure it is in metrics. Groink 18:57, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

It actually is a rule. Just click on the image in the article and you see a warning about this already. Nobody has corrected it though. -- Atamasama 19:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Wow, it is! Not that I didn't believe you. Perhaps it should be edited otherwise. WeBuriedOurSecretsInTheGarden 19:44, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I think the problem is just finding an appropriate image. -- Atamasama 22:13, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

This discussion about the quarter is foolish. The current image shows a size reference that is not ideal but it is a size reference that someone could use. A ruler would be better for most people, but if it's a choice between no comparison and the quarter, then the quarter is better. So: if you don't like the quarter then go take a picture with a ruler and in the meantime quit complaining. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimo42 (talk • contribs) 10:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

It's not foolish at all, and you're incorrect that a quarter is better than nothing. It's worse than nothing, because not only is it not helpful to someone unfamiliar with the coinage, it's potentially misleading. If you come from a country where all of your coins are much smaller than a quarter (I'd wager that a quarter is larger than most world coins) then the quarter makes you think the item is smaller than it is. The best image to have would be a metric ruler next to the item, but failing that it would be better to just have the item shown on its own. -- Atamasama 18:22, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

SDK announcement/availability?

From the article;

On October 17, 2007, Steve Jobs, in an open letter posted to Apple's "Hot News" weblog, announced that an SDK would be made available to third-party developers in February 2008. Due to security concerns and Jobs's praise of Nokia's digital signature system, it is suggested that Apple will adopt a similar method. The SDK will also allow application development for the iPod touch.[55]

Following the link, I can't find the open letter- there's a press release on the date stated, but it's about iTunes Plus- nothing about the iPhone, iPod Touch or any SDK. Was it ever there? Has it been removed? Am I just missing something? 193.201.135.244 13:16, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I corrected the link. It was at the main hot news page in the beginning, but soon after it was moved. Groink 20:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I reverted the link to Hot News multiple times yet people still kept putting it back, despite my warnings that it's a dynamic page that would soon no longer have that info. Thanks Groink. -- Atamasama 01:26, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

News

http://www.fh-augsburg.de/multimedia/mobile-experience/HIT/doku/Layout_und_Infobereich.pdf Jan Effenberger 62.237.32.178 16:42, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, this is the English version of Wikipedia, that's not very helpful. -- Atamasama 01:30, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Pricing Info?

Why does there seem to be no information related to the iPhone's cost? I just went to their website and found the cost of it to be surprisingly cheaper than I imagined (at $399). Additionally, it seems worthy to note a bit about the pricing plans for service, such as $20-$40 more for current AT&T customers (oh, and maybe directly state it is only for AT&T?). --TerraGamerX 13:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Because this isn't a catalog or a buyer's guide. There's no reason to have that kind of info in this article, or any other Wikipedia article. If the price was incredibly significant or noteworthy, for example some rare diamond worth a billion dollars I'd see that belonging in an article but if someone is coming to Wikipedia to shop for holiday gifts they're at the wrong site. -- Atamasama 17:38, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

iPhone Software Updates

• Can we add information about the Nov 16, 2006 software update 1.1.2 http://www.macnn.com/articles/07/11/08/iphone.v112.due.frida ?
• Can we breakout the software updates into a bulleted list to make it more user-friendly?

Thanks! Mhhursh (talk) 16:01, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Just mention that the latest version is 1.1.2, and then point the reader to an official Apple web page containing the details? This type of information isn't encyclopedic. Groink (talk) 02:21, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Specifications

This section duplicates the content in the hardware section. Why don't we merge it into the latter? Or is it meant to give a brief view?, though since in wikipedia we really don't have to emphasize the specs, I don't see a point if that's the intent. -- Taku (talk) 10:35, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

OS X != Mac OS X

Regarding my edits... If you read the many official Apple documents, the company is VERY careful about what term they use to reference the operating systems of either the Macintosh or iPhone. Googling around, whenever Apple mentions the iPhone, they mention the OS as "OS X." Anytime they talk about the Macintosh computer, they mention the OS as "Mac OS X." Remember, the iPhone is a telephone appliance, while the Macintosh is a computer. The two run different processors. Both devices cannot run each other's applications - even if you were to somehow re-compile - as the two devices utilize different libraries that are unique to its hardware architecture. OS X 1.x is based on Mac OS X. But that is as far as the relationship goes. One other reason for the distinction between the two is that the version numbering for Mac OS X 10.x dates back to 1984 when Macintosh System 1.0 was released. If you go around calling the iPhone's OS "Mac OS X 1.0", that's basically synonymous with Macintosh System 1.0 (Apple changed the name from "Macintosh System" to "Mac OS" when Apple decided to license the OS to other hardware manufacturers like StarMax, Power Computing, etc. where none of them were actually Macintosh computers.) So throughout the article, I made sure that any references to the Macintosh version of OS X is mentioned as "Mac OS X", and references to the iPhone's version is "OS X." Groink (talk) 10:52, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Good catch. You are correct that the iPhone is not a Macintosh computer, and Apple is careful not to call the OS on the iPhone "Mac OS X". Calling it such is inaccurate at best if not misleading. -- Atamasama 17:10, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Use of flags

I propose that the flags used in the infobox be removed, per WP:FLAG and WP:MOS. In summary, the flags used in this article are more decorative than informational and encyclopedic, which goes against these guidelines. Also, not everyone knows what the flag for China looks like, so visually it does not help the reader. And, if your answer is for the reader to move the mouse pointer over the icon to see what country it is, that is a demonstration of poor web page design - as the page is no longer readable by non-visual means, such as the blind. Groink (talk) 18:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

They're also no good for iPhone browsing, ironically enough, since you can't mouse-over without a mouse. -- Atamasama 20:13, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

No, but you can put your finger on the flag icon and hold it there; at least with later versions of OS X, it'll pop up a balloon with the title and URL (it might be a bit tricky to get the balloon without activating the link, but it is possible). Guy Harris (talk) 20:46, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Battery

There have been some changes and reverts in the article regarding the battery type in the iPhone. According to Apple, on their specification page for the iPhone, it is a lithium ion battery. But it has been suggested by other editors that it is a Lithium Ion Polymer battery. If someone has an official source that contradicts what Apple itself claims, I'd like to see it, otherwise please don't post misinformation. -- Atamasama 19:51, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

http://www.ifixit.com/Parts/images/stream/images_large/10-1.jpg This is a picture from the disassembly, it clearly states li-ion polymer in the upper left - Bombadier337 21:44, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I guess that's hard to refute. Even though Apple officially states it as Li-Ion, they might just be simplifying things. I do know that the differences between Li-Ion and Li-Ion Polymer are significant enough that just saying Li-Ion is inaccurate. If someone reverts the info again we can point to this discussion. -- Atamasama 23:20, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

There may also be a possibility that Apple does in fact use Li-Ion on a "regular" basis. It is common for a parts vendor to run out of inventory, and therefore temporarily replace the part with something similar, such as the polymer battery shown in the photo. Just the sight of a specific device using the polymer battery does NOT mean that ALL iPhones use it. Therefore, I would suggest using the official Apple claim that the iPhone uses Li-Ion and not the polymer. If, however, someone can prove that the polymer battery is commonly used in these phones - or if we find out that "both" batteries are used, then the article should point that out. IMHO, the photo uploaded basically demonstrates "original research" which Wikipedia is against. I'd like to see something such as an official Apple service guide verify this finding. -- Groink (talk) 20:57, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Check out this apple kbase article about battery technologies and naming, where they pretty clearly lay out that they view li-polymer as a type of li-ion. – ɜɿøɾɪɹℲ _{( тɐʟк • ¢ʘи†ʀ¡βs )} 11:51, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Li-Polymer is a type of Li-Ion, that is true. That is why it is also called Lithium Ion Polymer. It's interesting that Apple is stating that they supply Li-Ion batteries that aren't identified as Li-Polymer, too bad they don't mention the iPhone in that link. -- Atamasama 20:08, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Typo

Error on page. Near the top. "A ringtone feature, introduced in the US on September 5, 2007, but not yet available in all the countries the iPhone hase been released yet" it should be has not hase. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.5.0.239 (talk • contribs) 15:32, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

And you can make it be "has". Guy Harris (talk) 22:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Except the page is semi-protected. That, and I already fixed it. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. Considering that the page has been locked since July, I'll unprotect it and see if the vandalism relents.--HereToHelp 23:30, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Ugh, the vandalism is back, I hope it doesn't continue. -- Atamasama 22:54, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

My take on criticism

I copied my comments from the iPod touch talk page... Here's where some editors and I differ: bugs can or cannot be criticized. There are basically two things going on here: 1) Bugs, and 2) Design flaws. IMHO, bugs should not be criticized - as bugs can be fixed. One person can experience the bug, while someone else does not. That's why bugs cannot be criticized in an article like this. Wikipedia should be looked at as a permanent document. If Wikipedia were to take this article and burn it onto a CD-ROM, then forever and ever the bug-based criticism will be etched in that article. That makes absolutely no sense - as the bugs will be long gone, but a version of this document will keep mentioning it. This is the attitude we should all be following. On the other hand, design flaws are basically features that are purposely implemented by the manufacturer. These design flaws - it is open season for them regarding criticism!!! They should be consistent with EVERY unit made up to today - as it is unlikely the manufacturer will address them. HOWEVER, each criticism should be supported by information giving reasons why the device functions that way. For example, people claim that leaving out Java in the Safari browser is a safety feature, while others consider it something to criticize. IMHO, it is Java that should be criticized for its security issues, and not the application that would be using it, therefore the criticism made about Safari lacking Java is POV. That's basically where I'm coming from. Groink (talk) 21:37, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Something that possibly complies with your view on what should be critisized is the claim that the IMEI number (the number tied to your personal information) is sent to Apple, along with details of the information you are looking at. Apparently a group called Hackintosh has published the iphone code showing the code for doing this is part of it. Wayne (talk) 10:25, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

However, according to security experts, this is basically FUD. Quoting C-Net, "Heise Security analyzed the code string and said the iPhone isn't sending [the IMEI number], which is used to identify handsets on GSM networks. Most often, it's used to blacklist phones that have been reported stolen. Heise said the iPhone is sending something back to Apple, but it's much more likely some type of general usage data that Apple and many companies track to detect usage patterns." In short, code reporting back to mothership is not something to complain about - as just about every software application will do this to some extent in the form of cookies, looking up software updates (MS's Patch Tuesday, for example), and so forth. And then, your reply to that is, "Well, in software, I can disable or firewall those features." But then I can point you back to the service agreement you signed with Apple/carrier. Groink (talk) 18:33, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Undocumented features should be included in any article until the bug has been fixed by the company, at which point it can either be removed, or better yet, noted as having been fixed. Just because a bug can be fixed it does not mean that it will be fixed and if the bug is notable enough, there is no reason not to include it. Wikipedia is not paper, so there is no reason why it must only document "permanent" things. Wikipedia tends to do a good job of being staying current as a situation is updated and I don't see how this would change as Apple releases patches to fix bugs and include upgrades to existing "deficiencies" in the iPhone. --Bobblehead ^(rants) 18:47, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

But then again, Wikipedia is not a news site. It is not a technical support site. And, it is not a technical manual. Current events, such as earthquakes and political issues, should be updated on a regular basis. But for support issues regarding electronic devices, Wikipedia is not the right place to be tracking bug fixes and firmware updates. The right thing to do is to provide an external link to Apple's discussions forum. If you start to treat Wikipedia as a supplement to official technical support, you're heading in the wrong direction. And I don't agree with you regarding Wikipedia as being up-to-date. Maybe for something popular like an iPhone. But for other less-current or less-popular technologies, it is not up-to-date. You cannot go around treating one article one way and another article another way. There must be consistency across all Wikipedia articles. Groink (talk) 19:54, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

One other thing... Bugs are NOT - I repeat NOT undocumented features. That is a Microsoft joke, i.e. "It's not a bug. It's an undocumented feature." Groink (talk) 20:04, 21 November 2007 (UTC)