Underspeced? What? Compared to what? This is not even remotely defensible.
In its spec it offered a full color multi-touch gesture display —instead of a 132x65 pixel black and white screen.
Like Steve Jobs said, products are a series of choices.
In its spec it offered a full color multi-touch gesture display —instead of a 132x65 pixel black and white screen.
Like Steve Jobs said, products are a series of choices.
Nothing is, and nothing can be. Not even if you eliminate cost from the equation. Not even if you eliminate manufacturability, or supply chain availability. You're holding the original iPhone to an impossible standard.
The iPhone was arguably the best product Apple could have made for that price, to be released on that date. Sure it could have been better and more expensive. It could have been better and further delayed. It could have been better and also worse in some other way.
It also launched without cut and paste available in the UI, which again, was silly given how it was otherwise an impressive mobile computer.
First available March 2007, three months before the iPhone was introduced. * Memory - 160MB, versus iPhone: 128MB.
* CPU - Dual CPU, 332 MHz Texas Instruments OMAP 2420 (ARM11-based), versus Samsung 32-bit RISC ARM 1176JZ(F)-S v1.0 412 MHz
* Display - iPhone: 320x480 18-bit 3.5", versus N95: 240x320 24-bit, 2.6"
* Network ability: HSDPA 3.5G, versus iPhone: GSM/EDGE
* Camera: 5MP, versus iPhone 2MP
N95 was priced at $750 vs. $500 for iPhone.
N95 could have up to 4hrs talk time, 8hrs with WiFi turned off! iPhone could do 8hrs. iPhone could also browse the web for 6 hours, play videos for 7hrs, play audio for 24 hours.
N95 was more expensive, with worse software, worse screen, worse battery life.