July 19th, 2007
Told ya: turns out I may be right about the "Nano iPhone"
You’re not catching me at my best in my “nah, nah I was right” moments. In the silicon-based world, I’ve been flamed for them, and in the carbon-based world, I’ve been dumped for too many of them.
But I am provisionally going to go “nah nah, told you so” here.
Now, if a report on Apple Insider cited by my colleague Tom Krazit is correct, Apple appears to have a downpriced, Nano-like iPhone scheduled for release sometime before the end of this year.
You may remember the original fuss here. Taiwan-based analyst Kevin Chang depended on a newly published Apple Patent application to issue such an outlook. And in a rare event for an analyst firm, three stateside analysts for Morgan issued furious denials.
Just about all the mainstream media and the blogosphere went along with these denials, saying in effect the Taiwan-based analyst- well-sourced in the chip community- was playing loose with the facts. They mocked him, and his issue of some clear Patent app language as overly speculative.
I saw, and see, things differently. I need to tell you why.
Apple would not be pleased for the potential cannibalization of iPhone sales that could occur if news of a cheaper iPhone got leaked prematurely. I mean the fanboys and fangirls have theirs, but if news got out that a cheaper model was in the works, don’t you think millions of potential iPhone buyers would sit on their wallets?
I raised some issues here.
Well hey guess what.
AppleInsider’s Kasper Jade writes in part:
Extremely reputable sources have told AppleInsider in recent weeks that the company’s iPhone roadmap for the 2007 calendar year includes not one but two distinct models, the second of which is set to turn up just months after the first.
According to one source, development of the second model has followed so closely on the heels of the inaugural iPhone that it was making its final pass through engineering around the same time that today’s model hit the manufacturing lines back in May or early June.
Conceived as a scaled back, lower cost alternative to today’s iPhone, the second iteration of the handset is presumed to marry iPod functionality with rudimentary cellular capabilities. More resource-heavy Internet browsing and e-mail capabilities are not expected of the device.
In providing the first visual descriptions of the handset, long-standing industry sources — who’ve continually been in tune with Apple’s future music directions — have dubbed the device “an iPhone nano” because they say it best describes the the handset’s overall form-factor and aesthetic.
Not only that, but Kasper notes it is possible that this downmarket iPhone could be sold in other locations, and via other wireless carriers.
I am wondering that if any other wireless carriers come on board for this device, they will further signify competition with AT&T by offering the iPhone on faster networks than AT&T’s S-L-O-W EDGE.
If these reports are right, almost every reporter and blogger owes Kevin Chang an apology. A big honkin’ one.
‘Ceptin’ me, because I have believed in him all along.
Loading ...Russell Shaw is an enterprise computing journalist, analyst and author based in Portland, Oregon. See his full profile and disclosure of his industry affiliations.
