5 devices once thought to be original iPhone killers
0. phoneArena 03 Jun 2012, 09:50 posted on
As we’re nearing the 5-year anniversary of the original iPhone’s release here in the US, we can’t help but recall how much of a profound impact it made in the mobile landscape. Before its arrival, smartphones primarily consisted of portrait QWERTY devices...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
87. John.V (Posts: 90; Member since: 27 May 2011)
Storm competed against the iPhone 3G if I remember correctly. And the Palm Pre for Sprint came out a month before the iPhone 4S release. Therefore, I didn't include them, but then again, I do consider them as other iPhone killers.
97. ojdidit84 (Posts: 190; Member since: 16 Jul 2011)
The original Palm Pre for Sprint came out a month before the 3GS in 2009, not the 4S which was 2011.
15. Commentator (Posts: 2172; Member since: 16 Aug 2011)
Seems like only yesterday...
Also, I would put the Palm Pre on the list too, but it's probably still too painful for PA, with it still being the highest ranked phone they've ever reviewed.
16. BREvenson (Posts: 190; Member since: 17 May 2012)
All of these phones, at the time, were solid alternatives to the iPhone in terms of pricing and features, but they didn't last long; devices like that age quickly, especially since Android came not too long after these phones. If you look at the market nowadays, the competition has grown in size and quality, and now there are many phones out there (Galaxy S II, EVO 4G LTE, Droid RAZR, One X/S, and more to soon come) that can be dubbed "iPhone killers".
They won't kill it, though...Apple has grown way too big and powerful to be knocked off by the competition. If anything, it will be Apple's questionable (and controversial) tendency to rely on patent lawsuits and anti-competitive business practices that will undo them in the future. For now, all people can do is pass on the iPhone and try something else.
35. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
None of these were solid alternatives. iPhone was way ahead of these phones. That's why it's funny to look back and see that anyone thought they would be iPhone killers.
48. taz89 (Posts: 1943; Member since: 03 May 2011)
agree most of those phones were pretty rubbish and even though they did some more things they did it shi* lol think the only good one was the lg prada and i think it actually sold well as it was the 1st capacitive phone and a mate had it and it was all right but i think people only brought it cause of the prada brand
80. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
way ahead. Back then the iphone couldnt send a picture message, 3G, do most things without wifi, and didnt even have fake multitasking.
These phones did everything the iphone did. The only true smartphones on this list are the windows 6 phones. The rest were feature phones. Even way back then, windows had true multitasking. On a side note, its interesting that the Storm, Pre, and Droid1 are missing from the list. Other than the voyager, they would have been the top selling iphone alternatives of their time. They were also the only 4 to have a huge media campaign behind them like the iphone did.
The iphone didnt succeed because it did the most or had the best experience in any category. infact, it didnt do much at all. But what it did it did well, it looked pretty for its day, and it had one hell of a marketing blitz and hype around it.
94. azazellov (Posts: 5; Member since: 03 Jun 2012)
Actually I disagree. It's true that Windows Mobile 6 and 6.5 were the most advanced technically. I know because I had an HTC Touch Pro 2 and an HTC HD2. But the problem was the interface, the iphone introduced the first usable touch interface. I think The windows mobile 6/6.5 interface was so bad that HTC had to introduce their own interface, Sense. In that aspect, as limited as it was, the iphone was by far the best. If you see early Android prototypes, they changed drastically after the iphone came out. I would never buy an iphone but I have to give credit where credit is due... I think the iphone was the only smartphone when it was introduced that was truly usable by anyone, just like the ipod when it came out compared to the other mp3 players available at the time.
122. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
exactly, while the iPhone may have had a few missing features, it was way ahead of anything else in UI. I mean look even today blackberry and Windows are struggling to keep up.
119. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
And 5 years later you still don't get it. You still don't understand why people are leaving T Mobile in droves to get iPhones.
The original iPhone DID have multitasking btw. The whole no multitasking thing started with iOS 2.0 because Apple didn't allow 3rd party apps to multitask.
129. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
" You still don't understand why people are leaving T Mobile in droves to get iPhones"
umm.. because its not true.. lol. taco world is not the real world.
118. InspectorGadget80 (Posts: 5632; Member since: 26 Mar 2011)
and the iPhone have lots of bugs. over heating, include someone have a iPhone that EXPLODE in their car call drops. and a OVER PRAICE LAUNCH with 300$ price tag
120. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
dang man you can barely put a sentence together
148. -box- (Posts: 3564; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
Keep in mind these are competitors to the original 2G only iPhone, which wasn't super popular and was just on AT&T, and which was (oh wait, it still is) a feature phone with a lot of hype and apps which make up for its lack of built-in capabilities. I think the only iPhone "killer" would be the courts, if the companies that have/had been infringed upon by the iPhone (any and all versions, but mostly the original) had sued the heck out of apple and prevented it from either going to market or continuing sales, much like how apple treats almost any smartphone nowadays. Nokia and LG alone could have taken care of a significant portion of that, with Palm, RIM, Kodak, and a few choice others delivering the final blows. Innovation stifling, sure, and very harsh to one company, absolutely, but nothing we don't already have now. Another plus side, more Foxconn workers would be alive, too
17. 09wbd03516 (banned) (Posts: 140; Member since: 30 May 2012)
please there wil be al least 30 smartphone that better than that turd
Poor taco bwahahaha!!
22. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
just stating the obvious, but how could the Prada ever be labeled an "iphone killer", when it was released first?
23. smartphone (Posts: 160; Member since: 21 Oct 2011)
If these devices are thought of iphone killer no wonder iphone survives,
these are all stupid phones.
26. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
that was a horrible phone. soooo maaaany issues....
27. Edoctor (Posts: 2; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)
Not really, I have seen it run android and even ICS as one of the first fluently. A friend of mine still uses it as main phone and there has not been much reason to replace if you are experience oriented over x cores or y memory. I consider it to be the original android blueprint as for most handsets have copied it. It was released at the same time as N900, where I chose N900 then, I might not have so again in retrospect! (though N900 still gives you tons of geek bonus points :))
On topic: not such an controversial topic, as it's not possible to assume with any objectivity if people perceived said products were actual competitors. It's more interesting to look forward and argue in marketing demographics. Like saying, this sub-population will - when buying a phone - place a serious consideration between this and the Iphone. I think this is might be happening with the HTC one X or S2/3 where people are drawn to bigger screens. Though I think the Aple afficionado's are still largely a seperate subculture. Still also subject to a percentage of 'swing voters', although I see android users being more dynamic, less brand sensitive and being able to make a quick switch to for example windows phone when the perspective changes. interesting times.
81. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
dude, I sold the HD2. It was the most problematic phone Tmobile had that year, and is contender for most problematic phone ever for Tmobile. Local stories dont mean anything.
Notice how everyone that likes it is running android? Its NOT an android phone. Its a windows 6.5 phone. most people do not root and rom their phones.
and yes, running android it ran quite well. It was an Evo running windows after all. I had one that i used to tinker with until i accidentally cracked the LCD trying to replace the digitizer a few months ago.
89. ajac09 (Posts: 1211; Member since: 30 Sep 2009)
actually the htc hd2 came out BEFORE the evo so should be thoguht of as the evo was an htch d2 with android..(htc hd2 came out like 6-8 months before the evo)
131. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
the Evo was 10x more popular though, which is why it gets the cred. :)
95. azazellov (Posts: 5; Member since: 03 Jun 2012)
yeah it's completely true the stock Windows Mobile ROM was pure garbage. I would never have kept if it didn't run Android...
31. azazellov (Posts: 5; Member since: 03 Jun 2012)
Actually I'm still using the HD2, it runs ICS fine. I'm waiting to upgrade to the Galaxy Note when it comes out in July for T-Mobile. I bought the HD2 in March of 2010 and have been running the latest version of Android on it since the summer of 2010. But yeah with the stock Windows Mobile software I agree it was pretty bad. Still the hardware was great and it shows since it's able to run ICS to this day very decently.
102. good2great (Posts: 1033; Member since: 22 Feb 2012)
i say the HTC Tilt (ATT) and the HTC Touch Pro 2 (T-Mobile) were the iPhone Killers...
29. roscuthiii (Posts: 1712; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
The Prada was out before the iPhone... it is not an iPhone killer; the iPhone was a Prada killer. Logical fallacy. I don't really remember any of these phones being marketed as an iphone killer. The first one marketed as such I can recall is the original Motorola Droid on Verizon. Even the G1 was marketed more as an alternative than a killer.
Try putting a little more gasoline on your flame-bait articles John V.
99. jroc74 (Posts: 3952; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
I said I wasnt gonna go there about the Prada...lol.
All I will say is thumbs up from me... :)
And for real...no manufacture never really markets a phone as an iPhone killer. Thats the media, forums, blogs, etc. They might want you to notice their phone too, "hey, look what I can do too" but I havent really seen it marketed as a killer.
32. lubba (Posts: 1310; Member since: 17 Jan 2011)
Sorry there is no iPhone killer. Most oems using android can't come up with a consistent product to match the iPhone. Sure most will say android selling better or more but that's because you got cheap androids, middle androids, and supper androids all over the place. And most android phones are replaced every 3-6 months. Consistency is what makes the iPhone great.
134. lubba (Posts: 1310; Member since: 17 Jan 2011)
Thanks taco50. Though I'm not found of the iPhone, I do know what works. And yes I'm a WP enthusiast but don't call me a fanboy. You and I do know why the iPhone sells well. Its consistency and the those oems want to break that on WP which I do not agree. hey, I maybe your enemy, but in also your friend.
33. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
Remixfa owned all of these and told everyone how they were better lol. They forgot the Storm.
82. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
eeh no. Of that list I owned the voyager. Most of those phones were crap on that list. It fails to mention the big dogs like the Droid, and yes the Storm. You have never used one in your life so your idiot opinion on the matter counts for less than normal, which is saying something.
34. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5276; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
Here is a thought - the real iPhone killer will be Google's patent application for the Notification function. Can you imagine if iOS has to go back to a beep for incoming e-mail and messages? Sales had plateaued. Everyone (except maybe Taco) was complaining about the stupid way iOS did Notifications.
Naw, the future will kill the iPhone. You read it first on PA.
38. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
Hahaha is this a joke. Sales for iPhone had plateaued because of notifications? You can't be serious. With everything android has copied form the iPhone I don't think Apple has to worry about notifications.
49. taz89 (Posts: 1943; Member since: 03 May 2011)
everyone copies everyone including apple...nothing is hardly ever original anymore in the phone world...as this article states the iphone wasnt even the 1st capacitive phone it was just the 1st popular touch phone...please lets not start a fanboy war :)
51. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
The prada and iPhone can't be compared. What was unique is how Apple put all of the technology together to change the way we interacted with our phones. I realize Apple didn't invent all the technology. They invented the UI.
61. taz89 (Posts: 1943; Member since: 03 May 2011)
agree the iphone was well packaged and the things it did was done great...the grid ui has been used in phones before the iphone but i agree apple did optimise it great for the touch screen but will not say they created the grid ui
63. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
They created a unique all touch interface that was designed to work with your finger. It was elegant, intuitive and fun to use.
I didn't say they were the first with a grid as blackberry had grids.
75. taz89 (Posts: 1943; Member since: 03 May 2011)
agree they were the first to make a touch ui elegant cant argue with you there
135. lubba (Posts: 1310; Member since: 17 Jan 2011)
Apple brought forth something no one would have ever done. Google capitalized on that success by bringing Android. Just too bad its basically a clone of ios.
36. zibbyzib2000 (Posts: 154; Member since: 18 Nov 2010)
If I remember correctly, the Palm Pre was one of the phones that most reviewers actually said it was an "iPhone killer" and that, although it might be one of the better alternatives to the iPhone, it just needed decent apps to support it.
40. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
The hardware sucked too. I did like web OS a lot though. I wish Palm hadn't gone out of business.
54. roscuthiii (Posts: 1712; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
What, you never liked the thought of shredding nacho cheese for your tacos on that super sharp Palm Pre chin?
That thing was a a concealed weapon.
59. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
You think would have learned and changed the body on the Pre 2. That thing was sharp as hell and the screen was tiny.
41. Whateverman (Posts: 3158; Member since: 17 May 2009)
There has never been and will never be an iPhone killer. The Droid outsold the OG iPhone but it's still here, right? Calling any phone an iPhone killer was just good press for the iPhone, and made it even more difficult to live up to. There is enough room for all of the OS's to exist, and the more quality OS's there are, the better it is for us.
52. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
The 2009 droid outsold a 2007 phone umm those were 2 completely different markets. Original iPhone was priced at $399 and droid was $199 not to mention the market demand for smartphones was completely different in 09.
Let's try to make some sense here.
72. Whateverman (Posts: 3158; Member since: 17 May 2009)
You are the nit-pickiest little girl i think I've ever encountered in my life. I don't care how the market changed in that time. We talking about the introduction of devices to combate the iPhone which if I remember correctly, did not change except for getting 3G. It was still the same phone!
This is just further proof that you're brainwashed. You can't find anything negative in my comment about Apple so you manufactured one just to argue. You can't see past your own bias the fact that I have an Android phone to see that I was complimenting the the iPhone.
If your going to come at me, come at me with a little more effort. Put some thought into it before you speak or I'll just keep making you look silly. The sad thing is, I really don't have to do anything for that to happen.
93. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
2009 sales iPhone rushed the original droid sales
112. Sniggly (Posts: 6473; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Funny thing:remember what was declared Time's gadget of the year? Hint:it wasn't the iPhone 3GS. The DROID started a fine tradition of leapfrogging Apple in capabilities.
114. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
Android has never leap frogged Apple in anything and you know that.
You have to move past your VZW brain washing
121. Sniggly (Posts: 6473; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
The DROID had a much better camera and video recorder than the 3GS, plus all the advantages that Android offered over the iPhone at the time. It also came standard with a 16 gig card, whereas the iPhone at the same price point was stuck at 8 gigs. Leap. Frogged.
And don't even try to debate me on the camera; anyone who comes in with a 3GS has nothing but complaints about how crappy its camera was.
141. jroc74 (Posts: 3952; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Dont forget screen res...that before the iPhone 4....didnt matter.
After the Retina Display came out....all of a sudden ...it mattered.
132. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
you know, your right taco.
it couldnt have leap frogged iOS.
in order to do that, it would have to start out BEHIND iOS, and clearly from day 1 Android had way more features and a brighter future. iOS is trying to leap frog android, not the other way around. But every time they leap, they merely "almost" catch up, since Android is so far ahead.
Enjoy looking at the past, we will look at our bright future.