<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: iPhone hacking part of the Steve Jobs masterplan</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mobileindustryreview.com/2007/08/iphone_hacking_part_of_the_steve_jobs_masterplan.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mobileindustryreview.com/2007/08/iphone_hacking_part_of_the_steve_jobs_masterplan.html</link>
	<description>Daily news and opinion for 250,000 industry executives and mobile fanatics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 22:14:00 +0100</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: russell</title>
		<link>http://www.mobileindustryreview.com/2007/08/iphone_hacking_part_of_the_steve_jobs_masterplan.html/comment-page-1#comment-120244</link>
		<dc:creator>russell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2007 12:42:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.smstextnews.com/2007/08/iphone_hacking_part_of_the_steve_jobs_masterplan.html#comment-120244</guid>
		<description>RE:  The iPhone is a true case of marketing over substance; many phones already on the market easily compete, feature for feature, with the iPhone. 

The only people I have seen and heard say things like the above comment are those who don&#039;t have one and have never used one.

Even with it&#039;s shortcomings and things that might be better the Iphone is light years ahead of anything else in the market.  You really need to go use one for a couple of weeks .. the more you use it the more you understand what an amazing job Apple have done.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RE:  The iPhone is a true case of marketing over substance; many phones already on the market easily compete, feature for feature, with the iPhone. </p>
<p>The only people I have seen and heard say things like the above comment are those who don&#8217;t have one and have never used one.</p>
<p>Even with it&#8217;s shortcomings and things that might be better the Iphone is light years ahead of anything else in the market.  You really need to go use one for a couple of weeks .. the more you use it the more you understand what an amazing job Apple have done.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barry O'Connell</title>
		<link>http://www.mobileindustryreview.com/2007/08/iphone_hacking_part_of_the_steve_jobs_masterplan.html/comment-page-1#comment-96770</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry O'Connell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:56:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.smstextnews.com/2007/08/iphone_hacking_part_of_the_steve_jobs_masterplan.html#comment-96770</guid>
		<description>Rubbish imho...

1)  Hacking the iPhone means people can buy the phone and use it on any network they like.  Given the supposed lack of handset subsidy, it&#039;s not like they will be incentivised to go/stay with the exclusive network anyway.  If they arenâ€™t paying money to the exclusive network then the network canâ€™t pay Apple their cut of the subscription.  Furthermore, the networks are hardly going to play nice if they lose their exclusivity are they.  Not just with revenue share, they may choose to subsidise the handset also, something Apple want to avoid for a number of reasons, not the least of which is fear of cannibalising iPod sales.  Itâ€™s hard to see how Apple would want that.

2)  The iPod was truly revolutionary and showed people how simple and stylish Apple products could be.  If anything were going to drive Mac sales, it would have been the iPod, but it didnâ€™t.  Undoubtedly, the Windows boxes may begin to lose market share soon but this would more likely be down to good marketing (â€œIâ€™m a PC, Iâ€™m a Macâ€ ads) and a botches OS release by Microsoft.

3)  The iPhone is a true case of marketing over substance; many phones already on the market easily compete, feature for feature, with the iPhone.  As for ease of use, plenty of bloggers and journos have already expressed their frustration at how awkward this TWO HANDED PHONE can be on even the most basic of functions (like making or releasing a phone call).  People will take serious convincing to believe that using two hands is better than the norm of one thumb.

4)  Just being picky, but the logic of â€œthey will pick up either an iPodâ€“if the iPhoneâ€™s isnâ€™t enoughâ€“or a Mac, if it isâ€ is monumentally flawed in its expression.  Those who feel the phone isnâ€™t enough will buy an iPod but those who think the iPhone IS ENOUGH will buy a Mac?  More importantly, if the iPhone isnâ€™t enough for media then whatâ€™s the point of it?  Itâ€™s not a great phone by any stretch of the imagination.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rubbish imho&#8230;</p>
<p>1)  Hacking the iPhone means people can buy the phone and use it on any network they like.  Given the supposed lack of handset subsidy, it&#8217;s not like they will be incentivised to go/stay with the exclusive network anyway.  If they arenâ€™t paying money to the exclusive network then the network canâ€™t pay Apple their cut of the subscription.  Furthermore, the networks are hardly going to play nice if they lose their exclusivity are they.  Not just with revenue share, they may choose to subsidise the handset also, something Apple want to avoid for a number of reasons, not the least of which is fear of cannibalising iPod sales.  Itâ€™s hard to see how Apple would want that.</p>
<p>2)  The iPod was truly revolutionary and showed people how simple and stylish Apple products could be.  If anything were going to drive Mac sales, it would have been the iPod, but it didnâ€™t.  Undoubtedly, the Windows boxes may begin to lose market share soon but this would more likely be down to good marketing (â€œIâ€™m a PC, Iâ€™m a Macâ€ ads) and a botches OS release by Microsoft.</p>
<p>3)  The iPhone is a true case of marketing over substance; many phones already on the market easily compete, feature for feature, with the iPhone.  As for ease of use, plenty of bloggers and journos have already expressed their frustration at how awkward this TWO HANDED PHONE can be on even the most basic of functions (like making or releasing a phone call).  People will take serious convincing to believe that using two hands is better than the norm of one thumb.</p>
<p>4)  Just being picky, but the logic of â€œthey will pick up either an iPodâ€“if the iPhoneâ€™s isnâ€™t enoughâ€“or a Mac, if it isâ€ is monumentally flawed in its expression.  Those who feel the phone isnâ€™t enough will buy an iPod but those who think the iPhone IS ENOUGH will buy a Mac?  More importantly, if the iPhone isnâ€™t enough for media then whatâ€™s the point of it?  Itâ€™s not a great phone by any stretch of the imagination.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

