This kind of classification only makes sense in retrospect. Blackberries and Danger Hiptops were pretty much the best phones you could get in 2005. Sure, keyboardless phones existed but they weren't necessarily better.
The market was also incredibly fragmented both on the hardware and software side. The hard divide between feature phones and smart phones hadn't yet been delineated in a general sense (the Windows phones were just kind of clunky and weird, and Blackberry basically had it's own market segment and represented "smart phones" in the press). Phones just kept getting higher and higher end, and adding more and more features.
https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/best-mobile-phones-of-2006/
The most anticipated phone for 2007 was Nokia's N95, the press called it a "multimedia device". It came with GPS, quad-band, 5MP camera, Wi-Fi connectivity, an accelerometer, a Web Browser, a big screen, apps. It looks vaguely like an older iPod, but has a pop out numeric keyboard.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_N95
At the time it was considered one of the best phones ever released and sold 10 million. At the time it was sometimes called smartphone, but I think today we'd call it an advanced feature phone.
Android thus came out in this market, and the phones it originally targeted looked more like the N95 than the iPhone. When Apple introduced the iPhone, they rethought the form-factor and simplified it, getting rid of most buttons and making touch not suck. But functionality-wise the iPhone was about on par with the N95, and so was Android. However, the first iPhone didn't support user apps, had limited connectivity and sold only 6.1 million devices.
When Android started supporting phones with iPhone-like form factors, it wasn't a given that it would become the predominant form factor for phones. The first few generations of Android phones still features lots of vestigial keyboards and buttons and rollers and sliders and such carried over from the N95 and blackberry style phones that Android devices were also looking like. Once the iPhone style form factor started leaving everybody else in the dust, Android phones (and the OS) simply dropped that stuff also.
It was all just a bit of a pain to DO. Mount on a PC, copy video or ebook files over to certain directories, operate through the numeric keypad, etc... the cumulative friction of all that compared to the iPhone was pretty groundbreaking even if it in a lot of ways it was just a lot of things being "a little bit" easier.
But I still held on to it for a few years because it took a while for the iPhones to really be able to do all the same things.
Apple and Google now both run app store hosting millions of apps, they both maintain their own development environments and adopted more advanced languages to make it easier. It's easy to submit apps (relative to Symbian days) and even nontechnical users commonly install and use dozens of them. The development tech and available APIs are being added and improved at breakneck speed, relatively speaking.
I remember the day this was announced and even though I never bought into the Apple ecosystem I remember feeling that it was a game changing move.
At least as of Android 8, the OS still supports hardware keyboards (and likely the rest); my current phone has one and can scroll by swiping on the keyboard.
I think Apple's stroke of genius was in the software and UI/UX.
Which, in the end, helped us a ton with Android -- post iPhone announcement everyone wanted to compete with that, nobody knew how, and the carriers eased back a bit on their absurd requirements documents full of random features nobody cared about (WAP?).
At the time iPhone was announced we were already running on the prototype of what became G1 (Dream), with multitouch. We just expected it would be the second form factor to ship, after a more "traditional" blackberry wedge sort of thing (Sooner). Post-iPhone it seemed silly to ship such a device first (you can imagine the reaction), so we skipped it and shifted focus to Dream.
WAP made sense for its time: limited computing power, limited bandwidth, super low data caps.
I agree (more or less) with the fact that someone would have come out with something similar. I strongly disagree that it would have changed the world.
Apple had the "courage" to go all-in on the form factor with the retail footprint to sell it, and of course the built-in fan base and long history of innovation to make it interesting even in its fairly primitive form.
Any other manufacturer would have either been too small to be so influential, or would have hedged their bets with a dozen alternatives, and their "iPhone" would have just been another dusty device in the corner of an AT&T store that no one knew how to use.
Maybe small manufacturers, but if Nokia or Motorola had done it first (with good software) maybe we'd be a in different world.
Even if they had something great, the US focus of tech media would have made it hard to see, and the US/EU frequency differences would have made it hard to use in the US unless Nokia made a US version, but lack of distribution makes that less likely.
> or would have hedged their bets with a dozen alternatives
Nokia or Motorola wouldn't have bet their phone business on a single UI/hardware combination like Apple did, and so I don't believe it would have had the technological impact the iPhone did.
The removal of the keyboard, in particular, was far from universally perceived as a good idea at the time.
I also think it would have been quite a while before anybody would have had the guts to not provide a slot for memory cards or to not have removable batteries.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada
> It was first announced on 12 December 2006.
> It is the first mobile phone with a capacitive touchscreen.
> The LG Prada was announced shortly <<before>> Apple CEO Steve Jobs announced the iPhone on January 9, 2007.
> After the release of the iPhone the head of the LG Mobile Handset R&D Center was quoted saying he believed Apple had stolen the idea from the KE850 after it was announced as part of the iF Design Award.
iPhone just did what Apple's good at, taking existing technology and packaging it nicely, but it would have happened with or without them.
>Chris DeSalvo’s reaction to the iPhone was immediate and visceral. “As a consumer I was blown away. I wanted one immediately. But as a Google engineer, I thought ‘We’re going to have to start over.’”
“What we had suddenly looked just so . . . nineties,” DeSalvo said. “It’s just one of those things that are obvious when you see it.”
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/12/the-d...
Android was nearly ready to launch as a Blackberry clone when Jobs demoed the iPhone.
What is that method you are referring to?
I remember the BlackBerry Storm, the first touch screen phone by RIM launching at the same time as the iPhone 3G. No Wifi, slow janky scrolling, no apps (well, sure, if you don't mind downloading some random .jar that have to be recompiled for the custom fork they ran on that device). Felt like a rushed beta.
Meanwhile the iPhone just worked. Smooth scrolling, fast browser especially on Wifi. You could get apps from the AppStore, no friction.
https://www.androidauthority.com/lg-prada-1080646/
>The LG Prada was the first mobile phone with a capacitive touchscreen, but there are reasons why you don't remember it.
In my first post on this thread, I said Apple improved the packaging of smartphones (ie. form, UI, ecosystem).
I was at one of those TI partner companies during this time and we were contracted to assist with middleware for Android Sooner. I even got to test with one. Then everything got put on hold.
The carriers had complete control over everything up until Apple came along. Even Android enjoys the fruits of Apple's initial demands.
The main obstacle is SoC drivers that are kept closed.
How exactly was it limited? My only issue with older Windows Mobile devices was non-capacitive touch, and HTC HD2 (still on Windows Mobile 6.5) did not even have that problem.
Good luck running a desktop OS optimized for keyboard, mouse and large screens on a mobile phone with a small screen and only touch as input.
Oh. WinMobile was like that. And the original Android was like that. People went over to iPhone in droves, and Google had to scramble to change Android to mimic iOS.