Video: Gizmodo gets ahold of Apple’s Next iPhone

By | April 20, 2010

… While Apple may tinker with the final packaging and design of the final phone, it’s clear that the features in this lost-and-found next-generation iPhone are drastically new and drastically different from what came before. Here’s the detailed list of our findings:

What’s new

• Front-facing video chat camera
• Improved regular back-camera (the lens is quite noticeably larger than the iPhone 3GS)
• Camera flash
• Micro-SIM instead of standard SIM (like the iPad)
• Improved display. It’s unclear if it’s the 960×640 display thrown around before—it certainly looks like it, with the “Connect to iTunes” screen displaying much higher resolution than on a 3GS.
• What looks to be a secondary mic for noise cancellation, at the top, next to the headphone jack
• Split buttons for volume
• Power, mute, and volume buttons are all metallic

What’s changed

• The back is entirely flat, made of either glass (more likely) or ceramic or shiny plastic in order for the cell signal to poke through. Tapping on the back makes a more hollow and higher pitched sound compared to tapping on the glass on the front/screen, but that could just be the orientation of components inside making for a different sound
• An aluminum border going completely around the outside
• Slightly smaller screen than the 3GS (but seemingly higher resolution)
• Everything is more squared off
• 3 grams heavier
• 16% Larger battery
• Internals components are shrunken, miniaturized and reduced to make room for the larger battery

– via Gizmodo


Gizmodo has received a letter from Apple’s senior vice president and general counsel Bruce Sewell formally requesting the return of “a device that belongs to Apple.”

Gizmodo’s Jason Chen published the letter (shown below) with a response to Apple that insisted “we didn’t know [the prototype iPhone] was stolen” at the time that Gizmodo chose to shell out a reported $5,000 to obtain it from the person who claimed to have found it.

It is beyond dubious that Gizmodo would have paid that much money for a device if it did not reasonably think that it was anything other than a real prototype that belonged to Apple. Further, the fact that it was remotely wiped provided compelling evidence that it was in fact stolen.

However, in addition to the legal issues involved with buying stolen merchandise (which are in effect regardless of whether the buyer knows the goods are stolen or not), Gizmodo also faces legal consequences under California’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act. …

– via Apple Insider

Comment by tomatomultimedia:

“best viral promotion ever! great job apple, now show us what the real 4G looks like…”

Leave a Reply