FCC Approves iPhone

An anonymous reader alerted us that the iPhone is one step closer to hitting shelves. "The Federal Communications Commission approved Apple Inc.'s iPhone, clearing the way for the combined phone and music player to hit the shelves. Apple expects to begin selling the phones in late June. Some of the FCC documents confirm a few features of the phone, including it will have Bluetooth and Wi-Fi and will operate in the 1900MHz and 850MHz frequency bands. The phone uses GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications) technology and the low-speed GPRS (General Packet Radio Service) wireless data standard."

well-thats-not-very-exciting

[Roadmaster (96317)]

No 900/1800 GSM. Slow GPRS. No user-installable applications. Lame.

At least it has wireless!

Re:well-thats-not-very-exciting

[T-Bone-T (1048702)]

It does have 900/1800. The FCC didn't approve them because they aren't used in the US. It still got all the approval it needed to be sold.

Re:

[Divebus (860563)]

I know a lot of people who frown about what the iPhone can and can't do... but then they say they're buying one anyway.

I'm waiting for version 2

Re:well-thats-not-very-exciting

[mollymoo (202721)]

Will that be the jPhone or the iiPhone?

Re:well-thats-not-very-exciting

[emj (15659)]

i++
iPhone

Re:well-thats-not-very-exciting

[simcop2387 (703011)]

i'm waiting for the iPhone-shuffle, no display, just a button to call a random person on your contacts list.

This feature is not called "shuffle"...

[tlambert (566799)]

This feature is not called "shuffle"... it's called iDrunkDial.

-- Terry

Important Points

[Nazmun (590998)]

I don't see why this is labeled flame bait as he pointed out important limitations. I used cingular/at&t and due to gprs i never even thought about using serious netapps through the cellphone due to low speed and high cost.

For my current sprint phone I cancelled net features because it was barely used on this type of phone but it's much cheaper and faster. EVDO type networks (Verizon, sprint, etc.) are far better then what AT&T are using. My greatest disappointment about the iphone was the carrie

Re:

[T-Bone-T (1048702)]

I wish it was still modded flamebait. The very first statement was blatantly false and misleading and the last was "Lame". That looks like classic flamebait to me.

Re:Important Points

[qengho (54305)]

The very first statement was blatantly false and misleading and the last was "Lame". That looks like classic flamebait to me.

Welcome to Slashdot, newbie. [slashdot.org]

Re:Important Points

[truthsearch (249536)]

I read some of the comments in that old story and came across this gem [slashdot.org]:

Raise your hand if you have iTunes ...

Raise your hand if you have a FireWire port ...

Raise your hand if you have both ...

Raise your hand if you have $400 to spend on a cute Apple device ...

There is Apple's market. Pretty slim, eh? I don't see many sales in the future of iPod.

Very interesting considering what some are predicting for the iPhone.

Re:Important Points

[value_added (719364)]

I read some of the comments in that old story and came across this gem:

        Raise your hand if ...
        Raise your hand if ...
        Raise your hand if ...
        Raise your hand if ...

There is Apple's market. Pretty slim, eh?

I'll say. I've never seen anyone with four hands.

Re:Important Points

[qengho (54305)]

Sorry. There was this whooshing sound that, um, destroyed my concentration. Yeah, that's it.

EDGE is much faster than GPRS

[kherr (602366)]

I've been using EDGE through T-Mobile and it's much faster than GPRS. Not sure how it compares to EVDO and I won't vouch for AT&T's network, but it's misleading to tag the iPhone with "slow GPRS" when it supports EDGE.

EVDO is much faster

[Mr2001 (90979)]

EDGE's theoretical maximum is 473 kbps [wikipedia.org], while EVDO's is 2.4 Mbps [wikipedia.org] - five times as fast. Real world performance is more like 800-1200 kbps, which is still four times the real-world performance you can expect from EDGE.

Re:EVDO is much faster

[Sensible Clod (771142)]

I work with and test EVDO and EDGE data modems (same model, different carriers), and I can tell you definitely that EVDO, while faster, is NOT 4 times as fast. It's more like 20-30% faster in my experience.

Re:EVDO is much faster

[jayratch (568850)]

If you've done this real-world test, I have to ask the followup question. Have you compared the other US 3g technology? Being as the iPhone is pretty much guaranteed not to be available on Verizon, the more relevant question would be whether the 3g speed boost is worth the wait. My "real world" experiences comparing Cingular's EDGE and UMTS has pretty much consisted of "choppy video" versus "clear video." With the exception of downloading LARGE content files, ie if the device was running the iTMS, or possibly streaming media which is generally outside Apple's business model, I can't think of a lot of real situations where the extra bandwidth would be much worth the battery life sacrificed.

Re:EVDO is much faster

[kalidasa (577403)]

Do they have EVDO in Europe? No. So if you're trying to build a killer international product, EVDO is not what you're going to choose.

Re:EVDO is much faster

[Mr2001 (90979)]

Here [dslreports.com] are some speed test results. myvzw.com is the domain for all Verizon Wireless internet access: 1xRTT (slow), EVDO rev 0, and EVDO rev A.

Re:

[alisson (1040324)]

It depends on your region. I live in the Minneapolis area, and AT&T is easily the best provider here, for anything. The others have shoddy service.

Re:Important Points

[nxtw (866177)]

AT&T is now using HSDPA, which is significantly faster than 1xRTT, EDGE, GPRS, etc. and on par with EV-DO. Much of the network supports it, with a great number of deployments in the past few years. Also, compared to Sprint, AT&T has more 3G coverage in my market (out of the 4 3G networks here, Sprint, Alltel and Verizon EV-DO and Cingular HSDPA, only Verizon and Cingular bother to cover outlying areas).

The worst major carrier (digital broadband wise) is T-Mobile.

Re:

[outZider (165286)]

Luckily, T-Mobile is better at just about everything else, for a quarter of the price. Sure, I only get EDGE speeds. Then again, I'm not spending $80/month for data access.

Re:

[Shakrai (717556)]

NiMH, LiON et al just don't need replacing that often

Sure about that? Maybe you aren't as heavy of a cell user as I am but I've noted that every phone I've ever owned has needed a battery replacement. The talk and standby times on my LiON phones are noticeably reduced after 12 months. At 18-24 months it's bad enough to require a new battery or a new phone. And personally, I'd rather buy a new battery if nothing is wrong with my phone.

How much do you use your cell? I'm cell only and tend to log abou

Radio Schematic

[grumling (94709)]

Apple asked that other documents such as diagrams, a schematic of the radio, the radio bill of materials and operational descriptions remain private indefinitely. The FCC agreed to the requests.

Anyone else miss the old days when every radio came with a schematic? They were usually under the battery cover or in the manuals. It really helped spark an interest in electronics, at least for me.

Re:Radio Schematic

[Doppler00 (534739)]

Well.... if they were to do that the schematics would be grossly complex now days. You'd have a circuit schematic with 100's of pins per chip.... would be very impractical and useless to all but a dozen people. Besides, the schematic doesn't really say how it works, since all the circuitry is integrated into proprietary IC's. THOSE are the schematics Apple and other manufacturers keep to themselves.

Re:

[grumling (94709)]

Yea, I know, but at least if it were available somewhere...

The main reason the FCC doesn't require the print to be on the radio anymore is because most of them were impossible to read anyway.

Re:

[ls -la (937805)]

The main reason the FCC doesn't require the print to be on the radio anymore is because most of them were impossible to read anyway.

I'd guess it has more to do with companies with deep pockets wanting to keep their circuits secret.

Re:Radio Schematic

[tlhIngan (30335)]

The main reason the FCC doesn't require the print to be on the radio anymore is because most of them were impossible to read anyway.

I'd guess it has more to do with companies with deep pockets wanting to keep their circuits secret.

Actually, I haven't come across ANY recent FCC filings where the schematics are public these days.

Take a trolling of the FCC filings of anything these days, and the "summary" view lists schematics, internal theory of operation, etc, but it says they aren't public. The "detail" view (which lets you grab the filed documents) doesn't even list those. All you can get are the test report, test setup, manual, photos, internal photos, and maybe a couple of letters. Try it on your wifi card, or your cellphone, or your wireless mouse. It's a rare product where the schematic is actually available for free download from the FCC site.

Re:

[antibryce (124264)]

Synthesizers used to come with schematics too. They stopped when it became largely a collection of custom digital chips. I would imagine it's a similar problem with radios and cell phones. The schematic was there so you (or someone) could service it. But with it all being custom stuff there's not much anyone can do.

Re:

[Trailer Trash (60756)]

Anyone else miss the old days when every radio came with a schematic? They were usually under the battery cover or in the manuals.

Well, if the iPhone is anything like the iPod, it may well have a schematic under the battery, but you'd never know.

Re:

[ottothecow (600101)]

My fender amp came with a schematic (on a seperate piece of paper no less) about 6 years ago.

Was kind if interesting but simple and my guess would be that circuits these days are either going to be too simple to bother or too complex (and proprietary)

too bad

[Neuropol (665537)]

Vermont doesn't get to play with the new toys like the rest of the kids. Unicel has a firm grasp (sp/grasp/stranglehold) on the GSM network up here. As of current, and for what ever reason, they will also not be selling the iPhone. One would say go with Cingular or T-Mobile or which ever carrier applies, but one can't do that without penalty as well for not being on home network. If 50% of your calls, or more, are in non-network coverage areas for Cingular, you get the 'sorry-we've-dropped-you-as-valued-customer' letter.

Re:too bad

[by Anonymous Coward]

I feel sorry for all 12 residents of Vermont.

Re:

[R3d M3rcury (871886)]

Don't be too sure--I think it's only within the last twenty years that there were finally more people than cows in Vermont.

I grew up there. A wonderful place to grow up. A great place to visit. But I don't think I could live there anymore.

WTF

[jdc180 (125863)]

So this is coming out with cingular right? Where's EDGE or 3G? Congratulations Apple, you've released a phone that would have been competitve in 2003.

another prediction

[iroll (717924)]

Want to know what the killer app on the iPhone will be?

myspace.com

I'm a teacher, and I can tell you that at least 10% of my students have Sidekicks (or knockoffs), and that is all they do with them.

All.

Day.

Long.

This will be the next status item for teenagers and "trying-to-be-hip" parents everywhere. These are the people who buy a $500 purse and take it to the grocery store, or who buy $150 shoes and walk around with the tags still on. This phone costs no more than 3 pairs of pants for them. I already hear them talking about how much they hate their Sidekicks and how much they think the iPhone will rock. It's on their birthday lists. I have no doubt that Apple will be laughing all the way to the bank on this one, big time.

I'm not saying it has to happen, I'm just saying that I saw it happen with iPods and Sidekicks, and this has got all of the same symptoms.

Again /. readers miss the point.

[Steve Cowan (525271)]

People don't care whether their phone has GPRS or EDGE or EVDO or 3G. The points nobody's mentioning here that will make the phone take off are:

Decent resolution camera for a a phone.
Sexy touchscreen with multi-touch! This is new to any consumer device, not just phones.
Visual voicemail. A first for any phone.
Display changes orientation when you turn the device. Again: HAWT.
The promise of web browsing in your hand that sctually renders real web pages correctly.
Built-in iPod functionality that syncs with iTunes, and lists of songs/movies you can "flip" through.

It's not how much memory it has or how fast it communicates, it is the "unquantifiable" that sells things like phones.

Re:Again /. readers miss the point.

[dn15 (735502)]

The promise of web browsing in your hand that sctually renders real web pages correctly.

This is a huge feature to me. Not that I'm really going to drop all that cash on one. But its ability to zoom in and out from full page view to readable text makes it possible to use a "real" browser on a mobile device without limiting one's self to mobile-friendly sites.

Re:Apple will still need lots of luck

[rolfwind (528248)]

Another techie making the mistake that the checklist of features is all there is to a product.

Re:

[postbigbang (761081)]

Hmmmmm. What part of 'Apple cache'' didn't you read? Sure, distribution is nice. Marketing plans are nice. But it's not the same as slogging MP3 players and MacBook Pros. I doubt Xserve's do very well, despite their margins and accessorizing. Are they making money on media? Perhaps a little. Hardware margins are tight, and they're asking a fat wad of cash for a phone, even with the checklist. I wish them luck, but they'll be bruises.

Re:Apple will still need lots of luck

[seanadams.com (463190)]

What part of 'Apple cache'' didn't you read?

I read it and I also think you're wrong. Not everybody buys Apple products for their "cache" [sic]. Some of us buy them because they WORK BETTER, and that does not mean "has the most checkbox features".

Re:Apple will still need lots of luck

[Onan (25162)]

What part of 'Apple cache'' didn't you read?

The t.

Re:

[Mistlefoot (636417)]

Apple are now selling DRM free tunes. You ask how much music downloads may cost, and although I don't know the answer, I'm not sure how they'd justify DRM'ing music on the iPhone while telling us music should be DRM free for the iPod.

Re:Apple will still need lots of luck

[Shakrai (717556)]

AT&T as a captive carrier

You know, I really don't care for Apple and I tend to think that most of their products are more marketing success then actual functionality, but even so you can't really blame them for AT&T being a captive carrier. That's the way the damn cell industry works in the United States. The carriers have all the power. Ever tried to create an app for a cell phone? Ever tried to do something in the interest of your users and not in the interest of the carriers? Good luck!

Verizon and AT&T rank as the least friendly carriers to do business with -- both for developers and for their end users. Crippled phones, disabled features, draconian terms of service, etc, etc, etc. Sprint is slightly better and T-Mobile USA is probably the most friendly but even they pale in comparison to the freedom of choice that exists in the rest of the World.

I would encourage everybody to go read this [newamerica.net] document. It explains how the industry works and advocates for an adoption of wireless network neutrality and applying the carterphone rules to the wireless industry. There is simply no excuse for why I can't just go down to Wally World, buy any phone I want (from a $20 el-cheapo POS to a $600 PDA), plug my SIM card (or RUIM card for CDMA) into it and use it.

Re:

[The One and Only (691315)]

You're not the target market anyway--as nice as it would be for Apple to make a version of iTunes for Linux, it hasn't been done yet. Nonetheless, people who refuse to use commercial software for ideological reasons aren't Apple's target market for obvious reasons--although you'll probably figure out how to run Linux on an iPhone just for the sport of it, so best of luck to you.

Re:

[Doppler00 (534739)]

Windows Mobile already lets you do this. Has GPRS/802.11, and a skype client available is available. I don't understand why people get excited about the iPhone as a geek toy, when really it's being marketed to the same folks that buy the stripped down Razor and iPods. Just as much innovation is happening at HTC and Nokia with phones as with Apple, but I never understood why the main stream news media has such an obsession with Apple.

Re:Dev Kit?

[MrPerfekt (414248)]

Windows Mobile also lets you crash three times a day, runs extremely slowly, costs as much and doesn't interface well with anything except Windows.

Features I'm counting on the iPhone to not have.

Re:

[bitserf (756357)]

I agree that it's not marketed at geeks.

But I'd be hesitant to call anything that relies on Windows Mobile innovative. I have 3 different devices running some form of Windows Mobile (up to version 5) lying around gathering dust.

Having used the 802.11 "support" in Windows Mobile, it highlights to me *everything* that is wrong with the platform. A multitude of different ways to configure (and misconfigure) it. Patchy support for differing levels of the protocol. Configuration settings that don't "take". Havin

Re:

[T-Bone-T (1048702)]

It only works on 850/1900 in the US because that is all that is used. It also supports 900/1800 according to Apple.

Re:Low tech phone

[MrCrassic (994046)]

In my opinion, I highly beg to differ (this post is long, so please bare with me if you want).

Apple.com has this introductory product description:

iPhone combines three amazing products -- a revolutionary mobile phone, a widescreen iPod with touch controls, and a breakthrough Internet communications device with desktop-class email, web browsing, maps, and searching -- into one small and lightweight handheld device.

Let's look into this for a moment. Keep in mind that Apple is most likely targeting or at least attempting to re-acquire most of the audience that also bought their iPod products:

A revolutionary mobile phone

For us "geeks," this phone is probably nothing but the ordinary. We have already seen devices that surpass their "revolutionary" claims, at least specification wise. But it has no physical keypad. This is important. How usable is this "screen keypad" (something that has been tried, and has failed, before) and how well will the public receive it? I honestly expect that this technology is indeed "revolutionary," since their staple claims are normally their strongest and perform undoubtedly better than their competitors.

A widescreen iPod with touch controls

So Apple could market this as a quasi-evolutionary, no -revolutionary, upgrade to their current iPod line and possibly garner their old audience. Or they could entice the many who have been wishing for a touch-screen iPod with widescreen (the Zune finally dies here) with this product and let them have a phone on the side. Speaking as a "geek," I know I've seen oodles of phones with music players and MP3 capability, but it would be a lie for me to say that the majority of them are worth replacing an iPod or similar (for reference, check the RAZR with iTunes line and see what I mean...)

and a breakthrough Internet communications device with desktop-class email, web browsing, maps, and searching

Many people here have already bashed this phone for its somewhat antiquated connections to the Internet. But how many people in the United States use the full power of mobile internet on their phone? I know few who do more than purchase ringtones and other commodities for their device (if even that), and maybe do a quick search for something of the moment, like movie times (which are carrier-catered in most cases). The iPhone integrates this experience straight into the UI so a normal person doesn't even have to really open a browser to do the simple things. Want to search for a location? Just "tap" the search button. Need to find movie times? Can probably be configured there too. I wouldn't even be surprised if there is are OS-wide search functions built-in, which is something that few, if any, independent phone carriers have been able to accomplish (at least not with smartphones, which are still in their infancy).

Its obvious that the iPhone is up against lots of veterans in the field. But Apple is the MASTER of usability, which is what makes the bulk of the phone experience. This phone should and deserves to do very well.