I agree I would never buy a phone like this until it shakes out. My son, his wife and my daughter did buy them. It is still an amazing machine and I think if Apple can weather this issue(by doing the right things) it will be very popular.

Apple is getting a dose of what Microsoft goes through all the time. That just comes with be an industry leader.
No I still will not buy the iPhone until I am sure it has settled down. The battery thing is really an issue and one reason I won't have an iPhone anytime soon.

By the way, the iPhone does take photos. I get them of my granddaughter all the time. What it can not do is send them via text message. You have to use email.

Umm.. the iPhone does have a camera and I use it a good bit, you can buy a bluetooth headset for it, the battery thing is a non-issue. By the time the battery goes bad it will probably be time for a new phone anyway. My last phone had a replaceable battery and the phone would always fall apart when I dropped it where the battery attached. While I would love third party apps and BTW, Apple you really need a password manager for the iPhone please port Keychain to the iPhone.

I bought the iPhone for what it could do and do well not for how I could hack it. I don't hack or consider hacking any of my other electronics why should the iPhone be different. I can understand why a computer would need to be more open but I have no problem with a mobile device being more locked down.

I'm actually getting more annoyed reading all the blog posts and article talking about how Apple is messing up and how we can hack the iPhone. It seems like dissing Apple is the cool thing to do this week because that is where the buzz is but it's already starting to get old. Although it's probably working because you got me to comment here. ;)

Nice article, but a few points of correction:

1. The iPhone does have a camera. However, you are right in pointing out it has no capability to record video.

2. You can use a bluetooth headset. It just has to be a particular kind.

I'm annoyed by the whole lot of them. Even Nokia. Why is it that you can use the N95 phones with some carriers, but not with others? The entire mess just leaves me unsatisfied. We ought not pretend that other phone manufacturers have no quirks.

One unhappy iPhone consumer has not brought a law suit against Apple for dropping the phone's price so soon after product launch. Apple really screwed this up, in my mind. Good post, Bl.

@BL: I've written about this myself. Apple just made so many dumb, dumb mistakes with this phone.

Biggest mistake: Choosing AT&T, probably the least liked of the wireless companies. (And believe me, the competition in that category is pretty stiff!)
It was like a big FU to all their customers: want the iPhone? Then you have to switch to the worst wireless carrier ever. It was like Apple was making us prove our love and loyalty with this sacrifice.

My other problem with iPhone is that it doesn't replace my iPod. The memory is pretty small, so I wouldn't be able to put more than 25% of my music on there. And there's barely room for any sort of video- TV show or movies.

Oh dear. If you're going to launch into a jeremiad against a company, it is useful to get some basic facts right. Others have pointed out some really obvious errors in your post...

Two points. First, the choice of AT&T: what carrier would have made people happy? None. Over the years I've been a customer of all 4 of the big US mobile carriers, and actually, AT&T has been the best - in terms of coverage, service, price - by a wide margin. Everyone's experience differs, of course.

But not that Apple chose the largest carrier, which means the segment of people who don't have to change carriers is larger than it would have been with any other choice. Is that really dumb?

On the other issues: in the last day or so I've read some items about how the recent "bricking" upgrade made major changes to the phone OS, which apparently was hacked together to get it out the door. If that's true, then opening it up to 3rd party developers was really not possible - their works would have become obsolete immediately. It also explains the "bricking" phenomenon as unintentional.

Now, Apple's mistake if that's true was not being really clear with developers that they were telling them to stick to web apps because the phone was simply not ready for the kind of development people wanted to do. And that's a very real error that should have been avoided. But it's a different error than the malice you're attributing to them.

We also need to keep in mind that while 3rd party development adds great value to a phone, it's also something most people don't use - especially, I suspect, the trend/fashion segment where a lot of those iPhones are going.

I agree with you on the battery issue, though.

I don't have an iPhone; I don't like to buy the first generation of anything. When it's time to replace my BlackJack, the current iPhone offerings will probably be tempting.

The Nokia positioning is, I think, pretty limiting. Most buyers don't care, and they are positioning themselves strictly as an Apple alternative by doing this - a dumb move for a company with a real leader position in the market.

Ooops on the camera. My bad. But the Bluetooth has to be a specific kind and in my book, that still stinks.

I am hardly an Apple basher - I own and love an iMac (the only time in 25 years I could ever say i LOVE my computer) and I own Apple stock.

Even if it were ok for apple to prevent third party apps, which I don't think it is, it is the way they've gone about it that i object to.

*Note* that the headline says Dumb MARKETING MOVES.

"By the time the battery goes bad it will probably be time for a new phone anyway." No way. I am not into creating unnecessary landfill. That's a pretty scary argument, Patrick.

John: It doesn't matter whether AT&T is the second coming. I am not going to have Steve Jobs or anyone else tell me what carrier I can use.

I will buy a iPod Touch 3.0, when they get to the 30 gig model. Not before, pretty as it is.

@John:

YOU had problems with all 4 carriers. Sucks for you bro, but the fact remains that AT&T had some of the worst ratings: customer satisfaction AND reception. The Times or the Journal just ran an article the other day talking about how Verizon, which had long relied on its superiority in those areas was finally getting around to introducing some cool phones.

So to answer your question (with apologies of B.L. for jumping in)- either Verizon would have made a lot of potential iPhone users a lot happier, with Sprint & T-Mobile acceptable backups. The hue and cry over AT&T is pretty widely documented. Though, to B.L.'s point, the bulk of the dissatisfaction is being tied to one carrier. Even iTunes works on Windows.

Happy iPhone user here.

First, how many iPhone owners are savvy enough to unlock the phone and mess with the hardware/software? My guess is very, very little.

Secondly, I'm totally with John - all this bitching about AT&T when no carrier would have made people happy. It seems the people that are most pissed off that the iPhone is exclusive on AT&T are those that are locked into a contract on other carriers and can't get their paws on this super-cool machine.

Third, it's Apple people. This phone is revolutionary. Period. There's nothing like it. And the millions of blog posts out there (both good and bad) prove that.

Fourth, Nokia can do whatever the hell they want - make a "better" phone; a cheaper phone; a phone with more options and it'll sell like hotcakes and be the iPhone killer - by the way, have you met my good friend the Zune?

Say what you will about it. Wait until all the bugs are worked out (even though they fix the bugs with every software update). Hone in on all the negative press. But I gotta tell ya, it's still an amazing phone/toy.

Hi -- I'm Ann and I have serious iPhone envy...

In Spike's comment about, I fall into #2 -- "It seems the people that are most pissed off that the iPhone is exclusive on AT&T are those that are locked into a contract on other carriers and can't get their paws on this super-cool machine."

Yep -- that's me raising my hand now....

I'm with you Ann (and Spike). I love Apple and would have bought an iPhone at the Apple Store in Chicago between conference sessions, but I'm locked into a stupid contract. Will I give in and pay the contact cancel fee, considering or waiting until my contract ends... argh. Frustrating.

My guess is Apple wanted to work with one provider to ensure they could control the phone/its use/quality. The other carriers would not bow to Jobs demands. Therefore, AT&T wins. But, in a away, Apple is smart to protect their product & brand in this way.

i don't think the question is so much whether AT&T is good, as it is why steve jobs should tell me who i can pick for my carrier.

my verizon contract is up now, and i haven't had a new phone in 2 years. i love apple, am in love with my Mac, but am still going to hold out for the iPod Touch with 30gigs or more of memory.

given how things have gone so far, that should be right after christmas.

friendly (no money) wagers anyone?

While the conversation got focused on some aspects, such as the bluetooth headset and the AT&T performance, I would pay attention to some other issues.
The phone is going to face huge problems in Europe, where UMTS and 3G are the standards;
Wifi is not so widespread around and it will take time to achieve a decent coverage;
SMS are the standard for mobile users and not mail;
Apple stepped into a brand new market to them and this is proving to be far more competitive of the computer market.

It is fantastic to see a company that so dominated the portable music device market go through the school of hard knocks in a different segment.

I look at Motorola in a different light after watching this drama unfold with Apple.