Technology news and Jobs 
Our Blogs The BeerFiles Why not Apple Phone?
Our Blogs The BeerFiles Why not Apple Phone? | Why not Apple Phone? |
|
| by Stan Beer | |
| Sunday, 14 January 2007 | |
  
Featured Whitepaper
5 Best Practices for Smartphone Support
Knowing like most others that Cisco was owner of the iPhone trademark, I felt I could detect an undercurrent of mild surprise mixed in with the whoops of delight when Jobs announced the iPhone name. I was left in no doubt, however, that the thing the audience most wanted to see was not a new widescreen iPod or mobile Internet access device, but an Apple branded mobile phone. At the beginning of the iPhone presentation, Jobs announced that Apple was launching three new products, before we all realized he was talking about a single device. The "new product" that easily drew the greatest roar from the audience was the "revolutionary new mobile phone.” As we left the auditorium, the prevailing view was that Apple must have done a deal with Cisco over use of the name iPhone. Now that we all know that no such deal had been finalised, the question is why did Apple decide to go with the name iPhone. Aside from the fact that Cisco already has a product called iPhone, there is nothing especially captivating about the name. While it is true that iPhone is a convenient concatenation of the names iPod and phone, from what Jobs said at his keynote, the device is being positioned as a mobile phone first and an iPod second. Jobs made a point of saying that the iPhone is aimed squarely at capturing a share of the 975 million handsets a year mobile phones space. So why not simply call it an Apple Phone?{moscomment} |
Tags
| < Next story in category | Previous story in the category > |
|---|
