Early reports of the apple phone technology eludes to additional future funtionality being a possibility. That requires an extremely flexible hardware architecture and the additional componentry being software only. Not always whatt is demanded by customers of the industry infrastructure. Additionally - product czars like Steve Jobs have a passion for designing product that can not be upgraded (pre-planned obsolesence?).
>From a business perspective, every industry will nearly eventually become commoditized. The result being that disruptive technologies and features sets that are cdetermined by customers will become more frequent. This upsets the larger established manufacturing companies because there is a great deal of profit in making you buy the sun roof and high end stereo, just because you want the leather seats.
> >I wrote: >> ...I'd love to be able to find a >> cell phone that isn't burdened down (and made too complex) by hosts of > >> features I neither want nor need nor use. > >Josh Viney replied: >>...why build a phone that has to be a pure phone and can never be more >> than that? Why not build a phone that starts off as a simple phone, >but >> can grow with users as they demand more functionality?... > >I love that idea. One thing I've always hated about software is the >unending feature creep. For the first few years, each new release has >great new things that everyone needs. But once the developers have hit >all the main points, later releases get features that appeal to fewer >and fewer people, while adding complexity for everyone else. I used to >love Microsoft Word, up until around version 3. Now I can't use it for >more than a few minutes without yelling at my computer in frustration. >I wish I could still buy Word with version 3 features only, but updated >to run on the new machines, save/load new file formats, etc. >