Another week, another chance to comment on a tech story for the Scotland on Sunday. They're looking at the new generic iPhone type device coming out from China. Touchscreen, higher res camera, the whole bit.
It's hardly a shock that any successful electronic device immediately spawns dozens - if not hundreds - of imitators, but to people outside the tech industries, it seems shocking that some random company can 'rip off' the design of another device.
Of course without this whole ecosystem, the consumer electronics market would not exist as we know it. Trying to explain the difference between patented hardware technology, intellectual property and the user interface underlined for me, how little consumers understand about what is and is not allowed.
I used the PC as an example - pointing out how the generic nature of the hardware and the fact anyone can build components has made it the most widespread computer system on the planet. Then mentioned the Mac, which is of course locked and tied into Apple...
The piece in the SoS missed that part of my well-reasoned and fascinating reply, but despite this, it immediately attracted a legion of defensive Apple/Mac fans in the comments. They were cross about people dissing the iPhone and getting things wrong about Apple.
However cross they are, the point remains. The iPhone is lovely - it looks great, the UI is really rather good, but as a phone - as a smartphone, it's not great. The camera is moderate at best, the connectivity is shameful for a device released in 2007 and the locked down O/S and lack of third party software severely limits it's appeal to the higher end of the market here in Europe, which is already very well served by Nokia and SE. The price is appalling and the lock-in to a single network is the final nail in the coffin. O2's data charge controversy aside, it remains a hugely pricey way to have data on the go.
Of course the key is it's integration into the network. Apple's always been about the overall experience and one of the reasons they struck deals with individual carriers in separate countries is that they can shape and ensure a smooth and consistent experience for their users (plus they can fix prices and gouge the suckers for everything they can...)
Compare that to a cheap, generic clone device, the experience could be inconsistent across different carriers, it could be difficult to configure and you may not have access to every service.
However, that's the reality for everyone in Europe. If you own a high end handset, the chances are you can't do everything the manufacturer built into it because they don't want you to have certain services, or don't offer them - Visual Radio? Push To Talk? Forget it.
So the seamless integration may have great appeal, it may be worth the ridiculous price and lock in to a single carrier - for some people. For many, however, a cheap clone device, which is just as shiny, still plays music, has a better camera, allows them to take it to any network (oh and does not have dire threats from the manufacturer about 'bricking' their device if they do) and is open to third-party software, is going to be a far more appealing opportunity.
It might run S60 - or even Linux - then even I'll be happy.
