Following in the wake of Meizu's miniOne, Chinese firm Ainol has just rolled out its own attempt at drawing on the iPhone's anticipated success. The V2000 is strictly a media player with a smaller 3-inch LCD and features to match its shifted focus. A 600MHz ADI Blackfin chip provides enough decoding performance for the mainstay AVI format as well as various MPEG formats and even RealVideo; audio is just as diverse, with MP3 and WMA support backed by more exotic APE and FLAC lossless music. Voice recoring and an FM radio are built-in to round out the media playback options.
Games are also a strong component of the V2000, Ainol claims. Emulation is onboard for several classic video game systems, including NES and SNES systems, the Sega Genesis, and original NeoGeo arcade games. Over 10,000 titles are said to be playable using external controllers.Pricing and a release date for the latest Ainol player are yet to be fixed; Ainol describes the device as a prototype, suggesting a final release later in the year. The company however promises a single model that will rely solely on SD cards for up to 4GB of storage. Expectedly, the device is likely to see official sales in China.
2007年5月26日星期六
2007年5月25日星期五
Apple Rises After IPhone Media Report
APApple Rises After IPhone Media ReportFriday May 25, 1:55 pm ET By Rachel Metz, AP Business Writer
Apple Shares Rise Following Media Report That IPhone Will Be Launched June 20
NEW YORK (AP) -- Shares of Apple Inc. rose Friday after a media report stated the company's much-anticipated iPhone will be released June 20.
Apple shares added $1.83 to $112.52 in afternoon trading. Apple's shares have been rising steadily over the past year, hitting an all-time high of $115 on Wednesday. Growth in recent months has been fueled by speculation and consumer excitement over the hybrid phone and media player.
Apple spokeswoman Natalie Kerris would not confirm or deny the date. However, she noted "We have said consistently that we're looking forward to shipping the iPhone in late June and that has not changed."
Whenever the product launches, it will be available at both AT&T cell phone stores and Apple stores, Kerris said.
AT&T spokesman Mark Siegel also confirmed the product is still on track to launch in late June. "We're not going to get more specific than that," he said.
Siegel said he did not know where the June 20 date came from.
Clerks contacted at eight AT&T stores in New York said they had been told the iPhone would launch on dates ranging from June 11 to June 22.
American Technology Research analyst Shaw Wu said rise in Apple's share price Friday is being fueled by the CNBC report.
"It gives investors higher confidence it will be launched on time," he said.
As far as he knows, no date has been set yet for the phone's release.
"What we do know is it's going to be in the second half of June, likely in the last week or so," he said.
Wu doesn't know how likely it is that iPhones will appear on June 20. But Apple watchers may be skeptical of the day -- a Wednesday -- as Apple tends to launch products on Mondays and Tuesdays.
Podcast: Dealing with iPhone envy before the fact
A new report is out demonstrating iPhone envy among people who know very little about Apple's upcoming phone gadget. Since Steve Jobs debuted the product six months ago, the hype has been relentless. But will the wait be worth it? CNET News.com's Ina Fried explains the Apple mystique and the calibration of performance versus expectations.
The decades-old explanation for the origin of the universe posited a Big Bang sometime in the distant past. But new research is emerging that challenges that apocalyptic recreation.
For the last decade, it has been relatively child's play to smuggle a portable digital camera inside a movie theater and then secretly record a film. But equipped with new military-style goggles, antipiracy forces hope they can begin to stem the illegal recording of bootleg copies.
2007年5月24日星期四
iPhone no-show at Apple event
But Apple will unveil new laptops and iPods
Gregg Keizer
Apple will not be showing off its much-vaunted iPhone at June's Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC), according to a respected Wall Street analyst.
PiperJaffray analyst Gene Munster rejected rumours that Apple will tout its iPhone at the conference (June 14) in San Francisco. Apple will launch the new mobile phone in late June.
Instead, at WWDC CEO Steve Jobs will flesh out previously undisclosed features of its forthcoming new operating system (Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard), announce new MacBook Pro models, and possibly a revamped iMac desktop lineup.
Speculation is rife that Apple will show LED-backlit MacBook Pros using the new Intel Santa Rosa chipset.
Munster predicted that from July to September Apple would sell approximately a million iPhones at an average price of US$550 each.
Munster also predicted that a widescreen iPod (essentially a stripped iPhone) would ship in early autumn. "Expect Apple to launch new widescreen iPods with the iPhone's multi-touch technology at a price-point below the iPhone's $499," said Munster. "Like $399."
Gregg Keizer
Apple will not be showing off its much-vaunted iPhone at June's Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC), according to a respected Wall Street analyst.
PiperJaffray analyst Gene Munster rejected rumours that Apple will tout its iPhone at the conference (June 14) in San Francisco. Apple will launch the new mobile phone in late June.
Instead, at WWDC CEO Steve Jobs will flesh out previously undisclosed features of its forthcoming new operating system (Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard), announce new MacBook Pro models, and possibly a revamped iMac desktop lineup.
Speculation is rife that Apple will show LED-backlit MacBook Pros using the new Intel Santa Rosa chipset.
Munster predicted that from July to September Apple would sell approximately a million iPhones at an average price of US$550 each.
Munster also predicted that a widescreen iPod (essentially a stripped iPhone) would ship in early autumn. "Expect Apple to launch new widescreen iPods with the iPhone's multi-touch technology at a price-point below the iPhone's $499," said Munster. "Like $399."
iPhone: Apple Making All the Wrong Moves
Todd Sullivan submits: Last week I wrote a post on the iPhone in which I opined that the AT&T (NYSE: T - News) lockup was a mistake for Apple (NasdaqGS: AAPL), and that the real winner in all this was AT&T.
The #1 response from readers I received (other than I was a moron) was that this "was a short term arrangement that all carriers do, within six months the iPhone will be available to all carriers." Hold the phone (pun intended) - it would appear that the iPhone will only be available to the 47 million AT&T subscribers for the next five years!
USA Today reports the supposed half-decade deal also precludes Apple from developing a CDMA handset in that time. It would also appear that the arrogance and dismissive attitude Apple took with carriers during negotiations may come back to bite them. Word is that the #2 carrier in the US, Verizon, will introduce its own version and is claiming it will be an iPhone-killer. According to Denny Strigl, Verizon CEO, "We do have a very good response in the mill. You'll see that from us in the late summer."
Rather than have a market all to itself for some time by playing nice with all carriers, the attitude Apple took has caused a rush to introduce like versions to coincide with its launch. Now not only will the iPhone not be available to the other 140 million plus US cell phone users, but those folks will be able to get their own version from other carriers this summer. Anyone want to bet it will be available for far less than the $500 -$600 the iPhone will be?
Now, any Verizon offering will not have the iPod application that the iPhone will have, but if my many critics are to be believed, that was not going to be a major selling point anyway, so the elimination of it will really be an insignificant factor to those purchasing these phones from Verizon. What will matter? Price. If consumers are able to avoid cancellation fees, can get a similar phone at a cheaper price and already have an iPod, there is zero incentive to rush out and get the iPhone.
This also means that the 10 million units Apple plans to have sold by the end of 2008 will be done to 47 million AT&T subscribers, meaning one in five will have one? Doubt it.
How long does anyone think it will be before Research in Motion Limited's (NasdaqGS: RIMM) Blackberry has a version out there that will be available through all carriers?
When entering a new business, it is not really a good idea to strut in and tell folks who have been doing it for many years how much better you are than them and why you are going to dictate what they can or cannot do. All reports out there indicate this is what Jobs did and in the process, seems to have caused other carriers to compete with him rather than work with him. Bottom line is that he needs their networks for his product; he seems to have forgotten this or chose not to recognize it.
I said before that the iPhone, as things are currently configured, will be nothing more than a niche product and that it will be Apple's first stumble after a string of hits in recent years. If the USA today article is correct, the AT&T deal all but assures it.
The #1 response from readers I received (other than I was a moron) was that this "was a short term arrangement that all carriers do, within six months the iPhone will be available to all carriers." Hold the phone (pun intended) - it would appear that the iPhone will only be available to the 47 million AT&T subscribers for the next five years!
USA Today reports the supposed half-decade deal also precludes Apple from developing a CDMA handset in that time. It would also appear that the arrogance and dismissive attitude Apple took with carriers during negotiations may come back to bite them. Word is that the #2 carrier in the US, Verizon, will introduce its own version and is claiming it will be an iPhone-killer. According to Denny Strigl, Verizon CEO, "We do have a very good response in the mill. You'll see that from us in the late summer."
Rather than have a market all to itself for some time by playing nice with all carriers, the attitude Apple took has caused a rush to introduce like versions to coincide with its launch. Now not only will the iPhone not be available to the other 140 million plus US cell phone users, but those folks will be able to get their own version from other carriers this summer. Anyone want to bet it will be available for far less than the $500 -$600 the iPhone will be?
Now, any Verizon offering will not have the iPod application that the iPhone will have, but if my many critics are to be believed, that was not going to be a major selling point anyway, so the elimination of it will really be an insignificant factor to those purchasing these phones from Verizon. What will matter? Price. If consumers are able to avoid cancellation fees, can get a similar phone at a cheaper price and already have an iPod, there is zero incentive to rush out and get the iPhone.
This also means that the 10 million units Apple plans to have sold by the end of 2008 will be done to 47 million AT&T subscribers, meaning one in five will have one? Doubt it.
How long does anyone think it will be before Research in Motion Limited's (NasdaqGS: RIMM) Blackberry has a version out there that will be available through all carriers?
When entering a new business, it is not really a good idea to strut in and tell folks who have been doing it for many years how much better you are than them and why you are going to dictate what they can or cannot do. All reports out there indicate this is what Jobs did and in the process, seems to have caused other carriers to compete with him rather than work with him. Bottom line is that he needs their networks for his product; he seems to have forgotten this or chose not to recognize it.
I said before that the iPhone, as things are currently configured, will be nothing more than a niche product and that it will be Apple's first stumble after a string of hits in recent years. If the USA today article is correct, the AT&T deal all but assures it.
2007年5月23日星期三
Verizon to Reveal iPhone Competitor This Summer
Verizon says it will have an answer to AT&T's iPhone by late summer
Although the iPhone now appears to be AT&T’s ace in the hole, Verizon actually had first dibs on the iPhone, but refused. Reports back in January said that Apple approached Verizon with the iPhone, but the carrier turned it down because it felt that Apple’s terms for exclusivity were unreasonable.
“We said no [to the iPhone offer]. We have nothing bad to say about the Apple iPhone. We just couldn't reach a deal that was mutually beneficial,” said Verizon Wireless vice president Jim Gerace.
Verizon, however, appears to have no regrets on passing up the iPhone, and even believes that the exclusivity of the phone won’t do much to help AT&T. Instead, Verizon believes that it has a superior network and cellular technology.
“The issue is not the Apple-ness of the iPhone itself, but with the cellular network that it is running on,” said Denny Strigl, Verizon’s chief operating officer, insinuating that AT&T’s network is sub-par. “That will be the true test of the iPhone: What will the iPhone experience be?”
Verizon isn’t going to simply play the waiting game while AT&T flashes its iPhone product on every advertising medium available. Although the carrier won’t be getting any Apple products in the near future, Strigl confirmed with USA Today that Verizon is already working with an unnamed manufacturer on a phone that will directly compete against the iPhone.“We do have a very good response in the mill,” the Verizon COO said. “You'll see that from us in the late summer.”
Although the iPhone now appears to be AT&T’s ace in the hole, Verizon actually had first dibs on the iPhone, but refused. Reports back in January said that Apple approached Verizon with the iPhone, but the carrier turned it down because it felt that Apple’s terms for exclusivity were unreasonable.
“We said no [to the iPhone offer]. We have nothing bad to say about the Apple iPhone. We just couldn't reach a deal that was mutually beneficial,” said Verizon Wireless vice president Jim Gerace.
Verizon, however, appears to have no regrets on passing up the iPhone, and even believes that the exclusivity of the phone won’t do much to help AT&T. Instead, Verizon believes that it has a superior network and cellular technology.
“The issue is not the Apple-ness of the iPhone itself, but with the cellular network that it is running on,” said Denny Strigl, Verizon’s chief operating officer, insinuating that AT&T’s network is sub-par. “That will be the true test of the iPhone: What will the iPhone experience be?”
Verizon isn’t going to simply play the waiting game while AT&T flashes its iPhone product on every advertising medium available. Although the carrier won’t be getting any Apple products in the near future, Strigl confirmed with USA Today that Verizon is already working with an unnamed manufacturer on a phone that will directly compete against the iPhone.“We do have a very good response in the mill,” the Verizon COO said. “You'll see that from us in the late summer.”
Apple's iPhone and the Future of Qualcomm: Part II
Sramana Mitra submits: Last week I wrote "Apple's iPhone and the Future of Qualcomm" (NasdaqGS: QCOM) and it generated a huge amount of controversy. My main point in the iPhone series is that if iPhone succeeds in becoming the industry galvanizing event that I think it will be (even if the product itself is a limited success for Apple), it will impact a lot of players in the eco-system.
One such player is Qualcomm, who owns most of the IP around CDMA, one of the two alternate network standards. The other one, ofcourse, is GSM. I suggested that if the world unites under one standard, and if that standard is GSM, then Qualcomm has trouble ahead. [There are 2 IFs here, folks …]
Readers pointed out that I have not taken into consideration the fact that Qualcomm owns a lot of the WCDMA patents as well.
In your recent blog, you state that the iPhone going with GSM(Cinglar) is bad news for Qualcomm. What you fail to mention is that Cingular/ATT is now rapidly upgrading their network to WCDMA to get faster data rates. Qualcomm is a leader in WCDMA and does sell chips and receive royalties. So, if Apple never plans to upgrade the iPhone to WCDMA, then your arguement would be correct. But, given that the iPhone could greatly benefit from a high speed data connection, logic might say that they would, at some time, move towards WCDMA, as this is what the Cingular network is doing. This would seem to be a benefit to Qualcomm.
(This reader requested anonymity, but was thoughtful and data-driven, unlike many others who suggested I stop blogging altogether because they disliked so much my analysis!)
I agree, that there is a very strong likelihood that Apple’s 3G strategy could include WCDMA, given that they would likely need to work with Verizon to win market share in the foreseeable future. My question, however, remains: Does Qualcomm’s WCDMA royalties compare with what they have in CDMA? Will it be a meaningful substitute financially? And will WCDMA win over and / or be an essential component of 3G/4G GSM in the long run?
It is precisely on this question that the opinion differs. Some say, “Yes, in fact, this is what made Qualcomm a hot stock. The fact that 80% of the world is GSM, but is migrating towards WCDMA, for which Qualcomm has chips and gets the same royalties as CDMA, because the essential patents are the same. Nokia (NYSE: NOK - News) is fighting this hard, but I think some agreement will happen.” Key question to ask: How fast will the GSM to WCDMA transition be? Will it be global? Are Qualcomm’s projections realistic? And will WCDMA be as big a building block of 3G/4G GSM / UMTS?
Morningstar says:
Nokia is trying to obtain a lower royalty rate for the next generation of mobile phones (or 3G WCDMA) by arguing that Qualcomm’s share of the intellectual property (NYSE: IP - News) behind the 3G WCDMA standard is much lower than its share of the IP behind the CDMA standard. In addition, Nokia’s share of the IP behind the WCDMA is second only to Qualcomm and much larger than it was in the CDMA standard. Nokia therefore argues it should be allowed to pay a lower royalty rate on WCDMA handsets. Qualcomm currently receives a royalty rate of between 4% and 5% on the sale of every CDMA- or WCDMA-based handset, with the royalty rate being the same regardless of whether it is CDMA or WCDMA technology.
Qualcomm’s future, therefore, relies on two things: WCDMA winning over GSM (UMTS/HSDPA) as the 3G standard, and CDMA sustaining itself, especially in the emerging markets, continuing to provide a strong royalty stream. (Note: Low-end phones on CDMA will also suffer from lower royalty revenue due to dropping handset prices, but that’s a totally different issue.)
Well, I am a huge fan of IP-Licensing business models. In fact, Qualcomm’s IP Licensing business QTL has an operating margin of 87%, and even if it drops a few points, it is unlikely to drop below 80%. QTL posted revenue of $759 million (34% of total). Whether this business will continue to thrive at the same growth levels or not depends on how the standards war fares in the upcoming years and whether a universal standard emerges in the next 5-7 years.
So what’s iPhone’s role in all this? As another reader points out:
If rumors are to be believed, then Apple tried to pitch the iPhone to Verizon first (which would have been a CDMA product). Only after Verizon walked away, did Apple pursue Cingular with a GSM variant. GSM, of course, also makes the most sense from a global perspective for Apple because it can then leverage the product throughout LTA, APAC and Europe (whereas the vast majority of CDMA subscribers are isolated in North America, Japan, Korea and India). And if Cingular’s exclusive on the iPhone expires, Apple would gladly create a CDMA version if Verizon is willing to commit to volume levels that create a sound business case.
All of the above is true. Apple is not YET in the position to call the shots on standards. If the iPhone becomes a huge success, then they COULD take the position that they would only support one standard, but this won’t be for 3-5 years. Meanwhile, the iPhone needs to establish itself as a Product success first, not just a PR success. Again, lots of IFs.
To end, I believe, that in the 5-7 year window, an opportunity for the market to converge on one standard would arise. If the iPhone does become successful, they would be in a position to drive this standardization, and if the Nokia-Qualcomm situation is any indicator, they would have allies in the market. Those include, at least, Nokia, Eriksson, Motorola, and possibly also Alcatel, Philips and others.
Why? Because, these are the companies who are the owners of the GSM patents, and those amongst them who manufacture handsets, negotiate cross-licensing agreements with each other, and don’t have to shell out the 5% royalty that they do to Qualcomm, if CDMA or WCDMA became the standard.
You can read more of the discussion around the previous article, under comments. And if you participate in the discussion, please refrain from using rude language, and stick to data and logic, but by all means, do feel free to disagree with me.
One such player is Qualcomm, who owns most of the IP around CDMA, one of the two alternate network standards. The other one, ofcourse, is GSM. I suggested that if the world unites under one standard, and if that standard is GSM, then Qualcomm has trouble ahead. [There are 2 IFs here, folks …]
Readers pointed out that I have not taken into consideration the fact that Qualcomm owns a lot of the WCDMA patents as well.
In your recent blog, you state that the iPhone going with GSM(Cinglar) is bad news for Qualcomm. What you fail to mention is that Cingular/ATT is now rapidly upgrading their network to WCDMA to get faster data rates. Qualcomm is a leader in WCDMA and does sell chips and receive royalties. So, if Apple never plans to upgrade the iPhone to WCDMA, then your arguement would be correct. But, given that the iPhone could greatly benefit from a high speed data connection, logic might say that they would, at some time, move towards WCDMA, as this is what the Cingular network is doing. This would seem to be a benefit to Qualcomm.
(This reader requested anonymity, but was thoughtful and data-driven, unlike many others who suggested I stop blogging altogether because they disliked so much my analysis!)
I agree, that there is a very strong likelihood that Apple’s 3G strategy could include WCDMA, given that they would likely need to work with Verizon to win market share in the foreseeable future. My question, however, remains: Does Qualcomm’s WCDMA royalties compare with what they have in CDMA? Will it be a meaningful substitute financially? And will WCDMA win over and / or be an essential component of 3G/4G GSM in the long run?
It is precisely on this question that the opinion differs. Some say, “Yes, in fact, this is what made Qualcomm a hot stock. The fact that 80% of the world is GSM, but is migrating towards WCDMA, for which Qualcomm has chips and gets the same royalties as CDMA, because the essential patents are the same. Nokia (NYSE: NOK - News) is fighting this hard, but I think some agreement will happen.” Key question to ask: How fast will the GSM to WCDMA transition be? Will it be global? Are Qualcomm’s projections realistic? And will WCDMA be as big a building block of 3G/4G GSM / UMTS?
Morningstar says:
Nokia is trying to obtain a lower royalty rate for the next generation of mobile phones (or 3G WCDMA) by arguing that Qualcomm’s share of the intellectual property (NYSE: IP - News) behind the 3G WCDMA standard is much lower than its share of the IP behind the CDMA standard. In addition, Nokia’s share of the IP behind the WCDMA is second only to Qualcomm and much larger than it was in the CDMA standard. Nokia therefore argues it should be allowed to pay a lower royalty rate on WCDMA handsets. Qualcomm currently receives a royalty rate of between 4% and 5% on the sale of every CDMA- or WCDMA-based handset, with the royalty rate being the same regardless of whether it is CDMA or WCDMA technology.
Qualcomm’s future, therefore, relies on two things: WCDMA winning over GSM (UMTS/HSDPA) as the 3G standard, and CDMA sustaining itself, especially in the emerging markets, continuing to provide a strong royalty stream. (Note: Low-end phones on CDMA will also suffer from lower royalty revenue due to dropping handset prices, but that’s a totally different issue.)
Well, I am a huge fan of IP-Licensing business models. In fact, Qualcomm’s IP Licensing business QTL has an operating margin of 87%, and even if it drops a few points, it is unlikely to drop below 80%. QTL posted revenue of $759 million (34% of total). Whether this business will continue to thrive at the same growth levels or not depends on how the standards war fares in the upcoming years and whether a universal standard emerges in the next 5-7 years.
So what’s iPhone’s role in all this? As another reader points out:
If rumors are to be believed, then Apple tried to pitch the iPhone to Verizon first (which would have been a CDMA product). Only after Verizon walked away, did Apple pursue Cingular with a GSM variant. GSM, of course, also makes the most sense from a global perspective for Apple because it can then leverage the product throughout LTA, APAC and Europe (whereas the vast majority of CDMA subscribers are isolated in North America, Japan, Korea and India). And if Cingular’s exclusive on the iPhone expires, Apple would gladly create a CDMA version if Verizon is willing to commit to volume levels that create a sound business case.
All of the above is true. Apple is not YET in the position to call the shots on standards. If the iPhone becomes a huge success, then they COULD take the position that they would only support one standard, but this won’t be for 3-5 years. Meanwhile, the iPhone needs to establish itself as a Product success first, not just a PR success. Again, lots of IFs.
To end, I believe, that in the 5-7 year window, an opportunity for the market to converge on one standard would arise. If the iPhone does become successful, they would be in a position to drive this standardization, and if the Nokia-Qualcomm situation is any indicator, they would have allies in the market. Those include, at least, Nokia, Eriksson, Motorola, and possibly also Alcatel, Philips and others.
Why? Because, these are the companies who are the owners of the GSM patents, and those amongst them who manufacture handsets, negotiate cross-licensing agreements with each other, and don’t have to shell out the 5% royalty that they do to Qualcomm, if CDMA or WCDMA became the standard.
You can read more of the discussion around the previous article, under comments. And if you participate in the discussion, please refrain from using rude language, and stick to data and logic, but by all means, do feel free to disagree with me.
订阅：
博文 (Atom)