iPhone 2.0 pricing explained: two levels of "subsidy"

The new iPhone pricing represents a $360 2 year price increase for contracted non-iPhone AT&T customers compared to the old iPhone pricing.

This is because the old iPhone pricing model was a relatively good deal for contracted AT&T customers. AT&T has brought the iPhone in line Windows smartphones, the BlackBerries, etc.

This hurts. The 16GB model costs $299 for customers without a current AT&T contract, $499 for contracted customers.

Ok, but AT&T also extends the contract of an existing customer when they buy an iPhone. How can they do that if you're not getting some kind of compensatory value?

Well, here's the trick. I bet you were wondering what the "contract-free" $699 iPhone was about. Why would anyone every buy that? Why does that price point exist?

Well, think about it. Remember AT&T is extending your contract. What is it they're giving in return? The answer is $200 off the $699 price. In other words, a second level of subsidy.

AT&T may not intend to sell any phones at the $699 price point, but they need that price point so they can say customers are being compensated for their contract extensions.

Now, what happens when you lose or break your iPhone? Do you have to pay $699, or will AT&T offer you the $499 "subsidized" phone along with a contract extension? Might that depend on how much time you have on your contract?

The old iPhone plan, from a consumer perspective, was vastly better than the new, fully evil, AT&T iPhone plan. The good guys lost.

Sundry iPhone discoveries: none good

AppleInsider summarized 3 reviews.

There's no good news in the bunch; anything good has has been out for a while. My comments in parens.

1. With 3G enabled, the iPhone 3G's battery drained much more quickly in a typical day of use than the battery on the original iPhone. (Just as Jobs said a year ago. Many didn't believe power drain would be so bad.)
2. While iPhone Software v2.0 allows for both personal and Exchange email accounts to function simultaneously, synching Exchange calendars and contacts will erase any personal calendars and contacts. (Clearly there's a limit to Apple's genius. I'm definitely disappointed, but not surprised.)
   
3. Old iPod accessories meant to charge over Firewire circuitry (such as a Belkin car kit) don't work; iPhone 3G still only recognizes USB. (I'd never heard of this limitation. Annoying, but it's unlikely ever to change.)
4. The GPS receiver's antenna is too small to replicate turn-by-turn navigation of a full unit. (So the GPS companies should be ok.)
5. Battery replacement will still cost $86. (Still not user replaceable)
   

The worst news, by far, is that Exchange sync wipes personal calendars. In other words, the 2008 iPhone is no better than the 1996 PalmPilot (maybe a bit worse) at managing work and home calendars and contacts.

I will be buying my iPhone in the next week or so. I approach the date like a condemned man!

iPhone apps will not be able to synchronize with the desktop: OmiFocus

I'd asked again, recently, if iPhone apps would be able to synchronize with the desktop.

A month or two ago the Omni Group was writing about OmiFocus as though desktop sync would be possible.

Now they write: 

The Omni Group - OmniFocus for iPhone and iPod touch 

...Synchronized with your Mac via .Mac or WebDAV...

Yech.

Bad, but not surprising. This has been a hole for a long time, so we kind of knew Apple was going to short us on this one.

I assume Apple is guarding the sync conduits to ensure DRM of iPhone media. If so, it's a telling indicator of how DRM requirements will negatively impact iPhone usability.

Oh Android, I really do wish you were providing more competition.

Incidentally, Apple has given its own iPhone applications an enormous competitive advantage. Only they can synchronize with the desktop. So, Apple, any chance you're going to provide a task management tool?

No, I didn't think so.

Yech.

PS. How can Apple claim to be providing Exchange integration if the iPhone can't handle Exchange tasks at all?

What the heck happened to Canon?

As a rank amateur I’ve been asking about what the heck is wrong with Canon since they failed to boost light sensitivity in their low-end dSLRs.

Now the pros are beating on Canon for light sensitivity, auto-focus, and reliability (emphases mine) …

The D3, D700 and Canon - James Duncan Davidson

… I think the very next camera that Canon releases, which better be a 5D replacement at this point, is going to say a lot about how they intend to meet Nikon’s resurgence. If the 5D replacement is just a freshen up of the 30D to 40D variety and which doesn’t meet the challenge that the D700 brings, then Canon will be telegraphing that they’re happy with their market position selling the crap out of the Rebel XSi without worrying about the higher end. On the other hand, if they release a competent contender, then we’ve still got a two horse race.

What will be a competent 5D replacement? At a minimum, it has to have usable ISO 6400 that is as good as ISO 1600 on the current 5D and it has to have pro-level autofocus. I don’t care about more pixels at this point, though I won’t complain about a 16 megapixel sensor. Even with a larger sensor, it is the twin metrics of low to high ISO quality—two more stops at least over the current 5D—and capable autofocus performance that will tell the story. Anything below this threshold will say volumes about the direction in which Canon intends to take the platform…

Sorry James, Canon is in trouble at the low-end too.

Where did they go wrong? To me their biggest issue is sensor light sensitivity. Presumably they can fix the reliability issues, and some of their pro camera are felt to have good autofocus. The sensor though, is a scientific and technical challenge. If they can’t meet that challenge, Nikon will own dSLR business.

It's too late to short Adobe stock: Reader 9

As of today, Adobe's share price hasn't had a big recent drop.

Maybe insiders believe Google or Apple are really going to acquire them, just to get Flash.

Because looking at the latest release Adobe Reader knows Adobe is a disaster today. It's not just me, try Googling on "when did adobe go downhill"?

I'd guess they went off the rails a year or two before my adobe download manager post, so maybe January 2005. It would be interesting to know what happened then. Did some key people vest options and leave? What executive shuffle occurred? 

I won't be installing Adobe Reader 9 anywhere. I removed Adobe products from my OS X machines about a year ago, and life has been quite a bit nicer since. (Sure Adobe's photo editing apps are sweet, but they also show doom. How hard would it be to QA the app as a non-admin user?)

On XP I'm on Adobe Acrobat full (no reader). Eventually the gross security measures will force a reader update, at which point I'll switch to an open source alternative for ISO-standard PDF. I'm sure Microsoft will supply something, they're in far better shape than Adobe.

Digitizing a large CD collection

First I've seen this: Your Tech Weblog: Need your CDs digitized? Rent ripping robot. Too late for us, but worth noting.

Now I need something similar for my photos -- a high-end bulk load print scanner I can rent.

iPhone mystery: will Apple allow developers to do desktop sync?

I've been watching this for months. Despite all the SDK talk, there's no mention of whether Apple will allow app developers to sync with desktop apps (rather than with net apps).

This is a big deal for products like OmniFocus. Omni acts as though a solution is coming, but a week from go-live Mariner software doesn't know how this will work ...

Your Tech Weblog: Local firm making a spreadsheet for iPhone 

... He also needs [Mariner] Calc for iPhone to sync with Calc for the Mac, and is talking with Apple on how that might happen, but he has no idea when this critical hurdle will be overcome....

I assume that Apple wants very tight DRM and security for the iPhone, and that this has created their synchronization issues.

I wish Android were doing better. It would be nice for Apple to feel more competitive heat. As it is, they look ready to rule. For better and for worse!