SillyDog701

[Don_HH2K]

Today at Macworld, Apple unveiled their plans for the upcoming iPhone device. It combines a widescreen iPod and a smartphone into one box.

Well today, we're introducing THREE revolutionary new products. The first one is a widescreen iPod with touch controls. The second is a revolutionary new mobile phone. And the third is a breakthrough internet communications device.

An iPod, a phone, an internet mobile communicator. An iPod, a phone, an internet mobile communicator…. these are NOT three separate devices! And we are calling it iPhone!

Unlike traditional smartphones, the iPhone doesn't come with a stylus - instead, you use your fingers and an on-screen software keyboard to type, make calls, surf the Internet, and so on. The new system for finger navigation has been dubbed MultiTouch, and according to Steve Jobs, "BOY, have we patented it!"

Here are the announced specs of the device:

• 11.6mm thick
• 2 megapixel camera
• Speaker
• Mic input
• iPod connector
• Quad band GSM+EDGE phone
• Accelerometer (detects how you're holding it and adjusts screen)
• Ambient light sensor (auto-dimming)
• Proximity sensor (when you bring it to ear, turns off display and sound)
• Wi-Fi and Bluetooth 2.0

The phone runs a version of OS X designed for smartphones much like Microsoft's Windows Mobile editions. Yahoo! will be rolling out push-to-phone e-mail service for free specifically for the iPhone, much like the technology used by RIM's BlackBerry handhelds. At $500 for the 4GB model and $600 for the 8GB model, the phone is quite pricey.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0 x64; en-US; rv:1.8.1) Gecko/20061030 BonEcho/2.0 (mmoy CE K8N-X02)

[Antony]

iPhone allows users to play music in both vertical and horizontal modes, as it's a wide screen iPod.



And it's a video iPod, allowing watching movies as well.



The revolutionary phone provides users a new way to handle calls, working on voicemail and using iChat styled SMS.

It also has a built-in internet, providing email client and Safari. Safari also includes built-in Google and Yahoo! search. iPhone uses Wi-Fi and EDGE.

It is interesting to note that, in the bottom of Apple iPhone web page it says:

This device has not been authorized as required by the rules of the Federal Communications Commission. This device is not, and may not be, offered for sale or lease, or sold or leased, until authorization is obtained.

For more information, please see Apple iPhone web page.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.1) Gecko/20061204 Firefox/2.0.0.1

[Mandrake]

Cisco sues Apple over iPhone name

They want to be compensated with $$$ and want to stop all shipments of the Apple iPhone. What's really crazy, to me, is that Apple does not have the trademark for the iPhone. They asked Cisco if they could use the trademark, and the discussions went nowhere. Then they went and used it anyway. Now they're being sued by one of the largest IT hardware providers in the world.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.1) Gecko/20061204 Firefox/2.0.0.1

[Don_HH2K]

You'd think Apple would have at least got the all-clear for use of the "iPhone" name from Cisco before calling it the iPhone. They already used "Apple TV" for the iTV device; they could have just as easily had an "Apple Phone" or an "iPod Mobile".

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0 x64; en-US; rv:1.8.1) Gecko/20061030 BonEcho/2.0 (mmoy CE K8N-X02)

[Pu7o]

In the World of Antonyâ„¢, Cisco should be shut down, the owners should be arrested, etc.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/418.9.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/419.3

[DJGM]

In the World of Antonyâ„¢, Cisco should be shut down, the owners should be arrested, etc.

. . . then tortured and hanged!

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.2pre) Gecko/20061223 SeaMonkey/1.1

[orizng]

hehe, apple would lose this one in court unless it pays Cisco or change name.
but, despite this phone is clearly a very nice device, its just too expensive, with 2yr contract, it still costs $500 at least.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.1) Gecko/20061223 Firefox/2.0.0.1

[Antony]

ZDNet's Ed Burnette wrote something about the iPhone trademark issue between Cisco and Apple.

The Cisco iPhone trademark was registered on 16th November 1999 (Reg. No. 2293011). In order to keep a trademark registration active, Cisco has to file a Declaration of Use on or before the sixth anniversary of the registration date, in which Cisco states, under penalty of perjury, that Cisco has been using the trademark continuously during that period. The sixth anniversary would have been 16th November 2005.

Cisco did not file the Declaration of Use by 16 November 2005. However, the USPTO gives people an extra six months grace period for an extra fee. (This grace period would have expired 16th May 2006.) Cisco filed a Declaration of Use on 4th May 2006 which kept their registration active.

Cisco filed a picture of the box for the Linksys iPhone. The picture filed by Cisco (available in USPTO website) shows a box for the Linksys CIT200 Cordless Internet Telephony Kit, with a sticker showing the word "iPhoneâ„¢" affixed to the back, outside the shrink wrap.

Searching CIT200 product shows no mention of the word "iPhone", and Cisco renamed CIT200 to "iPhone" in December 2006.

It is possible the Declaration of Use (filed by Cisco) is defective, as there was no continuous use, and the sample that Cisco submitted was for a product not released until 7 months later. If Apple can prove in court that Cisco's Declaration of Use contined misstatements of fact, Cisco's registration can be cancelled.

More detail at ZDNET. ZDNet is part of CNET Networks.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.1) Gecko/20061204 Firefox/2.0.0.1

[Mandrake]

Cisco is now using the iPhone trademark for a VOIP type Phone sold under it's "Linksys" brand. They own the trademark. They are shipping products using that name.

Apple comes along and just starts using that name without permission. That is wrong. You would think a company like Apple, who threatens companies just because they use the word "pod" would be a little more respectful of other companies' trademarks. I'm 100% with Cisco on this one.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.1) Gecko/20061204 Firefox/2.0.0.1

[Antony]

It seems that New York Times does not like Apple's upcoming iPhone.

Want an iPhone? Beware the iHandcuffs (free login may be required after certain time)

Here is how FairPlay works: When you buy songs at the iTunes Music Store, you can play them on one — and only one — line of portable player, the iPod. And when you buy an iPod, you can play copy-protected songs bought from one — and only one — online music store, the iTunes Music Store.

The only legal way around this built-in limitation is to strip out the copy protection by burning a CD with the tracks, then uploading the music back to the computer. If you’re willing to go to that trouble, you can play the music where and how you choose — the equivalent to rights that would have been granted automatically at the cash register if you had bought the same music on a CD in the first place.

Even if you are ready to pledge a lifetime commitment to the iPod as your only brand of portable music player or to the iPhone as your only cellphone once it is released, you may find that FairPlay copy protection will, sooner or later, cause you grief. You are always going to have to buy Apple stuff. Forever and ever. Because your iTunes will not play on anyone else’s hardware.

For complete story, please refer to Want an iPhone? Beware the iHandcuffs. The story, in my opinion, is a rant on Apple FairPlay copy protection.

As usual, don't steal music, support your favourite artists by buying music through our iTunes link, and you can support SillyDog701 as well.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.1) Gecko/20061204 Firefox/2.0.0.1

[Antony]

The Mac Observer has an article... Was the Apple iPhone Announcement Really a Mistake?

Apple did something unprecedented at Macworld. They made the announcement of a major new product six months before it could ship. A detailed demonstration that lasted 80 minutes at the Macworld keynote revealed most of the operational details. Some publications think that was a grave mistake.

Maybe not.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.1) Gecko/20061204 Firefox/2.0.0.1

[Antony]

Since this is a Cisco case, rather than Apple's. I started a new thread, [sdt=12849]Cisco's iPhone trouble[/sdt] in another sub-forum.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/418.9.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/419.3

[Antony]

How important is a trademark Cisco does not use?

ZDNet blogs have a story.

And the product itself does not have "iPhone" trademark. Plus, the photos of the product appears to be photoshopped.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.1) Gecko/20061204 Firefox/2.0.0.1

[Antony]

Cisco, Apple put iPhone battle on hold

Apple and Cisco have put their iPhone legal battle on hold to talk over their differences.

In a joint statement, the companies said they had "agreed to extend the time for Apple to respond to the lawsuit to allow for discussions between the companies with the aim of reaching agreement on trademark rights and interoperability".
The battle began after Cisco sued Apple for using the iPhone trademark the day after Apple announced a new mobile phone and music player bearing the same name on January 10.

Cisco had earlier said it expected to come to an agreement with Apple over use of the name, which Cisco uses on a range of wireless phone products sold by its Linksys division.

Cisco, Apple put iPhone battle on hold (Australian IT, 2 Feb 2007)

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.1) Gecko/20061204 Firefox/2.0.0.1

[Antony]

News from Cnet News.com, Apple, Cisco extend negotiations on iPhone name:

"Cisco has agreed to give Apple an extension until Wednesday, February 21," Cisco said in a statement. "Cisco is fully committed to using the extra time to reach a mutually beneficial resolution."

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.1) Gecko/20061204 Firefox/2.0.0.1