Savor
Apr 18, 05:03 PM
LOL
Suing your own partner and supplier. What next Apple, are going to sue Sony or Omnivision? Sue Foxcomm because iDevices are made in China.
All Apple has is their interface. Without the hardware components, there would be no iPhone or iPad. It would be like Nintendo suing Sharp even though the 3DS screen is supplied by them.
I hope Apple learns to manufacture everything themselves. Google should stop supporting them. Same with Samsung. I want Apple to do it all alone. I want every developer and hardware to turn their back on Apple. Expect more delays with the iPhone 5.
Incredibly petty. Why ruin relationships with your partners when you are still on the gravy train?
Suing your own partner and supplier. What next Apple, are going to sue Sony or Omnivision? Sue Foxcomm because iDevices are made in China.
All Apple has is their interface. Without the hardware components, there would be no iPhone or iPad. It would be like Nintendo suing Sharp even though the 3DS screen is supplied by them.
I hope Apple learns to manufacture everything themselves. Google should stop supporting them. Same with Samsung. I want Apple to do it all alone. I want every developer and hardware to turn their back on Apple. Expect more delays with the iPhone 5.
Incredibly petty. Why ruin relationships with your partners when you are still on the gravy train?
andythursby
Apr 18, 05:04 PM
Do you really think the Galaxy tab and iPhone 3g/3gs aer<sic> "identical"?
The galaxy tab looks like a cheap knockoff of the 3G, look at the pics comparing them in the article. As I stated, at first look my mum thought the samsung was an iPhone. To the general public they look extremely similar, thus why this is happening.
The galaxy tab looks like a cheap knockoff of the 3G, look at the pics comparing them in the article. As I stated, at first look my mum thought the samsung was an iPhone. To the general public they look extremely similar, thus why this is happening.
eawmp1
Apr 10, 09:07 AM
It's obvious. The answer is ALWAYS 42.
As for the math, the equation is ambiguous. Another set of parentheses would help.
As for the math, the equation is ambiguous. Another set of parentheses would help.
KnightWRX
Apr 23, 02:51 PM
That's the nice thing about the equallogic, right? ;)
Only issue I currently have with throughput is being limited by 4gigs when there are 30 some odd VMs running in our 3 host cluster. I would love to be fiber channel but between state budget cuts and PITA systems guy it ain't happening.
On thunderbolt though, I truly believe it will be a non-starter. Sure, it's cool for those of us that know about it but people in general won't know and won't really care either way. Honestly, consumers should already be above 10Gbps because the physical hardware is already there, just a matter of market elasticity.
You do realise you can switch your multi-path policy to something like Round-Robin or Least used link or something and use both your fabrics at the same time, giving you double bandwidth (in your 4 Gig port configuration, giving you 8 Gbps, or in a 8 Gbps FC configuration, 16) right ? Actually, you should have a look at what it is set to, some versions of ESX and ESXi are completely retarded and set the default policy to use Fabric 1 only (older versions prior to 4.x didn't have a supported configuration for using both paths at the same time, the support was experimental I believe).
Or you can run FCoE or FCoIP and use dual 10 Gbps for FC on the cheap (I do realise HBAs can be pricey). Or heck, iSCSI over 10 Gbps links...
Also, looking at my current I/O statistics for one of our biggest ESXi boxes (about 20 VMs), I see we average about... 10 mbps over the fiber. ;) Servers aren't constantly writing at full bandwidth anyhow and the convenience of centralized SAN management trumps Direct Attached Storage any day of the week in a data center environnement.
Heck, I wish our DMZ servers could be attached to the SAN (stupid Security policies) so that I could actually grow the filesystems on which the file repository sits... seeing how Sun (now Oracle) wants to charge us over 10k$ for about 72 GBs of disks, just because the hardware is EOL'd and it lacks the 2nd controller so that we can use the drive bays that are free in it...
Thunderbolt brings me back to those days. It's just not something I'd ever consider for data center use. It's not going to replace iSCSI or Fiber Channel. It's a complete non-contender in that space. Consumer space or workstations ? Yeah, sure, seems it could replace Firewire and USB disks, if the price and availability of actual peripherals is good. That last part remains to be seen.
Only issue I currently have with throughput is being limited by 4gigs when there are 30 some odd VMs running in our 3 host cluster. I would love to be fiber channel but between state budget cuts and PITA systems guy it ain't happening.
On thunderbolt though, I truly believe it will be a non-starter. Sure, it's cool for those of us that know about it but people in general won't know and won't really care either way. Honestly, consumers should already be above 10Gbps because the physical hardware is already there, just a matter of market elasticity.
You do realise you can switch your multi-path policy to something like Round-Robin or Least used link or something and use both your fabrics at the same time, giving you double bandwidth (in your 4 Gig port configuration, giving you 8 Gbps, or in a 8 Gbps FC configuration, 16) right ? Actually, you should have a look at what it is set to, some versions of ESX and ESXi are completely retarded and set the default policy to use Fabric 1 only (older versions prior to 4.x didn't have a supported configuration for using both paths at the same time, the support was experimental I believe).
Or you can run FCoE or FCoIP and use dual 10 Gbps for FC on the cheap (I do realise HBAs can be pricey). Or heck, iSCSI over 10 Gbps links...
Also, looking at my current I/O statistics for one of our biggest ESXi boxes (about 20 VMs), I see we average about... 10 mbps over the fiber. ;) Servers aren't constantly writing at full bandwidth anyhow and the convenience of centralized SAN management trumps Direct Attached Storage any day of the week in a data center environnement.
Heck, I wish our DMZ servers could be attached to the SAN (stupid Security policies) so that I could actually grow the filesystems on which the file repository sits... seeing how Sun (now Oracle) wants to charge us over 10k$ for about 72 GBs of disks, just because the hardware is EOL'd and it lacks the 2nd controller so that we can use the drive bays that are free in it...
Thunderbolt brings me back to those days. It's just not something I'd ever consider for data center use. It's not going to replace iSCSI or Fiber Channel. It's a complete non-contender in that space. Consumer space or workstations ? Yeah, sure, seems it could replace Firewire and USB disks, if the price and availability of actual peripherals is good. That last part remains to be seen.
rmwebs
Apr 21, 03:52 PM
Unless they can do it at a very low cost, I cant see them doing it at all. The rackmount market for the mac was minuscule with pretty much just specialist research and university/college networks using them. It would probably cost a lot in R&D to redesign the Pro, when it doesn't really need it. Its a functional design which is in keeping with the rest of the range.
As a Pro user, I'd LOVE to see new updates, but they should really be advances that you would expect from the Pro range:
- Better support for graphics cards
- Advancements to processor usage (4x CPU's for example)
- RAID card support
- Thunderbolt
- Fiber
you get the point.
Generally there is little NEED to use Macs in a server environment as its pretty much always possible to do it with Linux, and some cases Windows. I'm not denying that it has its uses, but the size of this market has made it impractical.
As a Pro user, I'd LOVE to see new updates, but they should really be advances that you would expect from the Pro range:
- Better support for graphics cards
- Advancements to processor usage (4x CPU's for example)
- RAID card support
- Thunderbolt
- Fiber
you get the point.
Generally there is little NEED to use Macs in a server environment as its pretty much always possible to do it with Linux, and some cases Windows. I'm not denying that it has its uses, but the size of this market has made it impractical.
Tomorrow
May 3, 08:03 PM
:confused: Not progress because you'd have to relearn something?
You missed my point; it isn't progress because it's an enormous step backward. It's not the "learning something new" part, it's the "throwing away everything you already know."
Mate, what progress would ever have been made if people always held to that argument? In the 80's/90's there were probably more than a few people in the design/publishing industry saying, 'Sorry, can't switch to Macs� Got 20 years experience rubbing Letraset down and maintaining my bromide machine.'
I would see your point if switching everything to metric would actually make things more efficient, but it wouldn't. People who use Imperial units are already comfortable with it - the system already works, and isn't broken.
You missed my point; it isn't progress because it's an enormous step backward. It's not the "learning something new" part, it's the "throwing away everything you already know."
Mate, what progress would ever have been made if people always held to that argument? In the 80's/90's there were probably more than a few people in the design/publishing industry saying, 'Sorry, can't switch to Macs� Got 20 years experience rubbing Letraset down and maintaining my bromide machine.'
I would see your point if switching everything to metric would actually make things more efficient, but it wouldn't. People who use Imperial units are already comfortable with it - the system already works, and isn't broken.
hobo.hopkins
Apr 23, 05:36 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
Wow, that App Store icon devoured my whole screen (MBP 13)
Yeah. Barely fits on my screen and i have a 24" inch imac.
it would be sick to have a 30" retina ACD. /dream
Yeah a 1024 x 1024 icon is amazing considering I would bet a significant amount of 1024 x 768 monitors are still being used. Imagine not being able to view an icon in its entirety on a five-year-old monitor!
Wow, that App Store icon devoured my whole screen (MBP 13)
Yeah. Barely fits on my screen and i have a 24" inch imac.
it would be sick to have a 30" retina ACD. /dream
Yeah a 1024 x 1024 icon is amazing considering I would bet a significant amount of 1024 x 768 monitors are still being used. Imagine not being able to view an icon in its entirety on a five-year-old monitor!
rtdunham
Nov 22, 10:47 AM
...it was the same for Creative, Real and now Palm...they are almost dead with their crappy PDAs
I like my Treo a lot. But what i really want is its capabilities (better executed) in a phone the size of a RAZR or Samsung A900. Maybe that can be done, maybe not.
I like my Treo a lot. But what i really want is its capabilities (better executed) in a phone the size of a RAZR or Samsung A900. Maybe that can be done, maybe not.
ergle2
Sep 17, 02:32 AM
I don't think you have to worry... I highly doubt a keyboard change. I would love a little more key travel on the current MBP keyboard, but obviously they would have to make the MBP thicker - so I'll live ;)
I don't remember who said it (after reading over 200 posts!), but I agree that the MBP 15'' 1-3 day shipping vs the 17'' 5-7 (or was it 8-10) day shipping is merely due to lower stock on the 17'', not a sign of a 17'' only update. I would think they probably manufacture and sell at least 2X the number of 15'' vs 17'' MBP's.
Apple wants their Pro line to be visibly different at a glance. This has been true for years. I don't see that changing now. Based on that, I agree with you that it's unlikely they'd adopt an MB keyboard for the MBP. They certainly don't want people to think it's "just" a silver MB, after all!
I'd figure on the 15" sales being considerably higher than just double due to the 17" being considerably more expensive.
Of course, it's arguable they serve different markets with some overlap rather than being in direct competition...
I don't remember who said it (after reading over 200 posts!), but I agree that the MBP 15'' 1-3 day shipping vs the 17'' 5-7 (or was it 8-10) day shipping is merely due to lower stock on the 17'', not a sign of a 17'' only update. I would think they probably manufacture and sell at least 2X the number of 15'' vs 17'' MBP's.
Apple wants their Pro line to be visibly different at a glance. This has been true for years. I don't see that changing now. Based on that, I agree with you that it's unlikely they'd adopt an MB keyboard for the MBP. They certainly don't want people to think it's "just" a silver MB, after all!
I'd figure on the 15" sales being considerably higher than just double due to the 17" being considerably more expensive.
Of course, it's arguable they serve different markets with some overlap rather than being in direct competition...
linuxcooldude
Apr 21, 02:53 PM
Making the width & height those dimensions, might make the length a lot longer. I could see space requirement problems & how would placement be effected without it being rack mounted?
Porco
Apr 23, 06:53 PM
All very nice and I'm fully supportive of more high resolution graphics as soon as possible. It's a shame they don't believe in supporting the millions of Blu-ray discs being sold though, and trying to convince people that 720p iTunes content is good enough for TVs that are bigger than any of the displays they've ever sold, whilst planning for smaller but higher resolution screens that they must apparently believe makes a difference.
jonnysods
Mar 27, 05:00 PM
Take your time Apple, make it a good release. Don't put it out just to be available at the same time as the iPhone 5.
DudeDad
Mar 29, 10:48 AM
For any of these cloud-based services, what is the streaming bit-rate/SQ? What if you don't have a signal?
I have concerns about the agreement with Amazon, as other posters have wisely pointed out....I'm sure Apple's will be similar, if not better....time will tell...
I have concerns about the agreement with Amazon, as other posters have wisely pointed out....I'm sure Apple's will be similar, if not better....time will tell...
roadbloc
Mar 28, 11:15 AM
Looks like it's gonna just be Lion and iOS 5.
http://i.imgur.com/ghf38.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/ghf38.jpg
nagromme
Apr 25, 09:12 AM
I want a Steve Jobs Magic 8 Ball.
kxbcvoi
Apr 20, 10:56 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
otherwise...why would I buy an ip5?
You don't have to.
It doesn't sound like there's much there to tempt iPhone 4 owners but it should be a great update for those with the 3GS and 3G.
Of course, for iPhone 3G user, like me , iPhone 4s or 5 will be a big upgrade.
otherwise...why would I buy an ip5?
You don't have to.
It doesn't sound like there's much there to tempt iPhone 4 owners but it should be a great update for those with the 3GS and 3G.
Of course, for iPhone 3G user, like me , iPhone 4s or 5 will be a big upgrade.
TedSlawski
Aug 7, 02:25 PM
Well a really fast computer at a reasonable price that you don't have to wait months for? I'm pinching myself before I make the call and order one. The idea that this could be what the original dual 2gig G5 that I (and a lot of other people) waited months for and really was kind of a ho-hum experience updating from a dual 800 quicksilver. Just playing around with a dual core iMac and being impressed says "this has got to be the one". The promise that they made for the G5 and didn't come across with. I would really like to play around with one of thses and say WOW!, not try to remember if it opened Photoshop faster than my quicksilver or not. 4 X 2.66Ghz Woodcrest�oughta do it!
david77
Apr 25, 10:30 AM
yes there is a problem. because it's unencrypted and everyone with access to your phone can read the information. the software tool they published showed my travel of the last 6 month quite accurately.
I don't want someone picking up my phone from my desk at work and find out what trips to what company I did. (it works internationally btw)
also I don't think the IRS or other tax collection agencies need to know when I was where.:D
Who is "everyone" with access with your phone? And my iPhone is either right next to me at my desk/home and in my pocket 99% of the time.
I don't want someone picking up my phone from my desk at work and find out what trips to what company I did. (it works internationally btw)
also I don't think the IRS or other tax collection agencies need to know when I was where.:D
Who is "everyone" with access with your phone? And my iPhone is either right next to me at my desk/home and in my pocket 99% of the time.
Huntn
Apr 14, 11:20 AM
This may be veering in a direction the OP does not want to go. If so, please ignore.
Speaking of taxes don't believe any politician who seeks your approval by saying "elect me and I'll lower your taxes". Most likely what they are saying is I'll lower your taxes a smidgen, but I'll give a dump truck of tax breaks to the wealthy who as leaders of industry will do their best to destroy your lively hood by exporting your job overseas.
What you want to hear from politicians on taxes is a discussion framed as "what services do we want from government, what do we want to pay for, how and who will pay for it, and expectation that the government will penalize corporations whose business practices are actively lowering the standard of living in this country."
Speaking of taxes don't believe any politician who seeks your approval by saying "elect me and I'll lower your taxes". Most likely what they are saying is I'll lower your taxes a smidgen, but I'll give a dump truck of tax breaks to the wealthy who as leaders of industry will do their best to destroy your lively hood by exporting your job overseas.
What you want to hear from politicians on taxes is a discussion framed as "what services do we want from government, what do we want to pay for, how and who will pay for it, and expectation that the government will penalize corporations whose business practices are actively lowering the standard of living in this country."
SBlue1
Apr 5, 03:10 PM
boooo! :mad:
Number 41
Mar 29, 01:22 PM
Hard for me, even as an Apple fan, to weep too much for a company that chooses to do business overseas isntead of here in America, employing Americans.
Hopefully the situation in Japan improves -- for reasons beyond this.
Hopefully the situation in Japan improves -- for reasons beyond this.
iStudentUK
May 3, 06:17 AM
You think you've got it bad? In Britain we have
milk and beer by the pint
coke by the litre
roads by the mile
tablecloths/fabric etc by the metre
petrol/diesel by the litre
fuel efficiency is measured in miles per gallon but carbon emissions are measured in grams per kilometer.
weight of people in stones and pounds
sugar/flour etc in kilograms
fruit by the pound
cheese by grams
bread loaves are labelled in grams, bread rolls sold by the dozen.
height in feet and inches.
It is a mess here. I wish we would switch fully to metric. I think we are getting there, very slowly. For example, 15 years ago the weather used to always be in oC and then oF, now just oC is very common. Supermarkets sell fruit and veg with the per kg price much larger than per lb. The around the corner sells milk by the litre which is nice. More and more people are using metres and kilograms to measure their height and weight. Some things are more problematic, there are millions of pint glasses for beer and all our road signs would be a fortune to replace with kilometres!
The imperial system is crazy, but I think it will slowly but surely die out in the UK. Metric was pushed in about 40 years ago? Give it another 40 and I think we will be fully there!
Hopefully our American cousins will finally see sense and start talking in civilised speak soon.
milk and beer by the pint
coke by the litre
roads by the mile
tablecloths/fabric etc by the metre
petrol/diesel by the litre
fuel efficiency is measured in miles per gallon but carbon emissions are measured in grams per kilometer.
weight of people in stones and pounds
sugar/flour etc in kilograms
fruit by the pound
cheese by grams
bread loaves are labelled in grams, bread rolls sold by the dozen.
height in feet and inches.
It is a mess here. I wish we would switch fully to metric. I think we are getting there, very slowly. For example, 15 years ago the weather used to always be in oC and then oF, now just oC is very common. Supermarkets sell fruit and veg with the per kg price much larger than per lb. The around the corner sells milk by the litre which is nice. More and more people are using metres and kilograms to measure their height and weight. Some things are more problematic, there are millions of pint glasses for beer and all our road signs would be a fortune to replace with kilometres!
The imperial system is crazy, but I think it will slowly but surely die out in the UK. Metric was pushed in about 40 years ago? Give it another 40 and I think we will be fully there!
Hopefully our American cousins will finally see sense and start talking in civilised speak soon.
nuckinfutz
May 7, 11:54 AM
Second, I'm not sure what you mean by "We're moving from this era where the expectation should be that Cloud services at a basic level should be incorporated into the product without the vendor resorting to advertisements." If you mean that we should get free Cloud services without ads then I think you're completely wrong and I'm most worried about sites that provide free services and have absolutely nothing but VC cash to pay for it. And if you mean we should have the option of paying for Cloud services to avoid ads, then fine, but you can do that with Gmail, so I don't see why you think MobileMe is any better than Gmail (from the privacy perspective).
Lastly, I wouldn't lump Google and Facebook together when it comes to privacy. Sergey Brin and Larry Page have made very strong statements about their respect for their users and they understand that without the users they'd have no company. Eric has made a lame-brained comment or two, and Google Buzz screwed up, but they fixed it (and at least when you signed into Gmail they had the option to opt out of it).
Facebook is a whole different story. Their whole exec branch seems to disregard privacy and they've been rolling out auto-opt-in feature after feature that removes your privacy.
Eric Schmidt's comments about privacy are disconcerting to me
�If you have something that you don�t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn�t be doing it in the first place.�
This is after the whole Google Buzz fiasco. There's money in trying to convince people to be open. Facebook and Google data mine consumer behavior to make money and consumers need to act like they got a good education and understand where they are being used.
The assumption that those that want privacy are doing something illegal is asinine.
Zuckerberg (Facebook) on privacy (http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebooks_zuckerberg_says_the_age_of_privacy_is_ov.php)
Privacy is a lot like Laws. You give it up it's hard to get back.
Hey it's not a choice for everyone. I'm just at a point in my life where $6 and some change is going to put me out especially when my online data is not being mined for profit. I've been happier than I though I would with my MobileMe account. I'm on the west coast so i'm assuming my data center is in Cali and performance has been fine.
Lastly, I wouldn't lump Google and Facebook together when it comes to privacy. Sergey Brin and Larry Page have made very strong statements about their respect for their users and they understand that without the users they'd have no company. Eric has made a lame-brained comment or two, and Google Buzz screwed up, but they fixed it (and at least when you signed into Gmail they had the option to opt out of it).
Facebook is a whole different story. Their whole exec branch seems to disregard privacy and they've been rolling out auto-opt-in feature after feature that removes your privacy.
Eric Schmidt's comments about privacy are disconcerting to me
�If you have something that you don�t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn�t be doing it in the first place.�
This is after the whole Google Buzz fiasco. There's money in trying to convince people to be open. Facebook and Google data mine consumer behavior to make money and consumers need to act like they got a good education and understand where they are being used.
The assumption that those that want privacy are doing something illegal is asinine.
Zuckerberg (Facebook) on privacy (http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebooks_zuckerberg_says_the_age_of_privacy_is_ov.php)
Privacy is a lot like Laws. You give it up it's hard to get back.
Hey it's not a choice for everyone. I'm just at a point in my life where $6 and some change is going to put me out especially when my online data is not being mined for profit. I've been happier than I though I would with my MobileMe account. I'm on the west coast so i'm assuming my data center is in Cali and performance has been fine.
SandynJosh
Nov 23, 12:57 PM
In looking over all the ideas generated in this thread and all the trends going on in the world, I'm lead to wonder if a consumer iPhone makes as much sense as it would seem to at first blush. Sure, the numbers can be great, but the profit potential is nearly nil.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.