Reality check: iPhone reviewers appear seduced, though AT&T Mobility’s network singed

The language being bandied about today by iPhone reviewers for consumer publications-think The New York Times and Wall Street Journal-is revealing.
The gatekeepers have been seduced. But at least they appear seduced by the device-if not by AT&T Mobility’s network coverage and capabilities-rather than by the Apple Inc. hype to which they’ve contributed.
Though two leading reviewers paint a mixed portrait, Apple has succeeded prior to launch. But the reviewers also provided balanced looks at the device itself and the “user experience,” an element so far missing from six months of the public’s and the industry’s largely self-induced hype.
The bottomline: Reviewers said today that the iPhone is sleek and fun to play with-particularly the Web-browsing experience-even though it lacks the functionality and services found in legions of other, less-hyped mobile handsets. Voice calls require multiple steps, however (no voice-activated dialing), multi-media messaging service is missing and the device’s EDGE speeds may unfairly direct criticism at AT&T Mobility’s network quality and coverage. (No doubt Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ minions are keeping a short list of complaints to address in the device’s second iteration.)
That dual portrait-and, of course, the consumer reception that begins Friday at 6 p.m.-will now be parsed for its lessons for the mobile industry.
A few seemingly obvious points, subject to debate:
By subsidizing handsets to sell profitable service plans, the top-tier network operators in the United States appear to have conditioned Americans to think of mobile phones as inexpensive but vexingly complex devices. The mobile industry, like other industries, has become somewhat insular, sometimes losing track of its consumers and their perceptions of devices and service. Few other companies besides Apple could leverage their brand awareness and cachet to parachute into this potentially lucrative consumer electronics segment with a worthy first product. Appealing design, fun and ease-of-use are critical elements in a device. And to come: hard data on whether a small segment of American consumers will indeed shell out top dollar for well-designed fun.
Questions abound: will a rising tide lift all boats? In other words, if the iPhone flies with consumers the way it seduced reviewers, will it shine the spotlight on other devices that provide similar functionality and/or sit at the high-end of the price range? Or will Apple’s unique brand awareness stymie the best efforts of top-tier handset vendors? Which if any incumbent handset vendors will benefit or take a hit from the iPhone phenomenon?
The reviews themselves focused only on the device in their hands.
David Pogue, personal technology writer for The New York Times, began his review by noting the device’s unprecedented hype, then captured his sense of the device’s contrasts. The device is “revolutionary” but “flawed,” as it “lacks features found even on the most basic phones,” Pogue wrote.
The caveats Pogue noted came late in his lengthy article, so they’re given here first. They include: six steps to make a phone call, documents can’t be edited, no GPS, the battery isn’t quite up to the hype, no memory card slot, the browser doesn’t handle Java or Flash, the camera is merely adequate and doesn’t provide video capture and text entry on the virtual keyboard on the touchscreen takes some getting used to. Finally, the device called attention to the shortcomings of its own EDGE capabilities and to AT&T Mobility’s network that supports it. Pogue tested the device in five states and confirmed in his tests Consumer Reports’ tepid ranking of the carrier’s signal quality. (Pogue gave AT&T Mobility’s service plan prices the thumbs up.)
Pogue’s accolades, however, came first in his coverage:
“The phone is so sleek and thin, it makes Treos and BlackBerrys look obese,” Pogue wrote.
The “bigger achievement,” however, is the device’s software.
“It’s fast, beautiful, menu-free and dead simple to operate,” he wrote. “The Web browser . is the real dazzler.”
And the clincher:
“It’s eye candy,” Pogue wrote. “But it makes the phone fun to use, which is not something you can say about most cellphones.”
Naturally, the Wall Street Journal’s personal technology columnist Walter Mossberg’s take is critical to press coverage.
Mossberg and co-author Katherine Boehret began their coverage by placing the device in context. A critical personal technology trend is the morphing of PC and laptop functionality into a handheld device-but most smartphones are complicated and clumsy and their designers have struggled to balance displays, input/output and battery life, the WSJ writers said.
“Though (the touchscreen) sometimes adds steps to common functions,” Mossberg and Boehret said, “the iPhone is, on balance, a beautiful and breakthrough handheld computer. Its software . sets a new bar for the smartphone industry.”
The touchscreen’s usability, though flawed, is a “non-issue,” the pair wrote.
The device’s “major drawback” is AT&T Mobility’s “pokey” EDGE network, “which is far slower than the fastest networks from Verizon or Sprint that power many other smartphones.”
“The phone can be a poor choice unless you are in areas where AT&T’s coverage is good,” the WSJ writers said.
The iPhone’s Wi-Fi capability makes up for this shortcoming in part, but not for users on-the-go, according to the review.
Drawbacks almost seemed nitpicky in the context of the WSJ piece, but the writers mentioned some limits to the touchscreen’s usefulness (a lack of dedicated hard buttons means the dreaded multi-tapping on the touchscreen), the inability to edit documents, error correction on input lags behind Research In Motion Ltd.’s BlackBerry.
The WSJ echoed the Times on design: the device is “simply beautiful” and thinner than the Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. BlackJack, which had won plaudits for its anorexic dimensions, though the iPhone is heavier than many competitors.
“On balance”-a phrase or concept emphasized by these two reviewers-the positives outweighed the negatives.
But remember, dear reader, these reviewers didn’t shell out their own money for the $500 or $600 device and the more than $1,000 for two years of AT&T Mobility service.
Next, the public weighs in this weekend via every electronic means known to human kind. Check your mobile browser for updates.