http://www.bbc.co.uk/britainfromabove/

However. Having said that.

Really, when you mod your iPhone, Xbox, or whatever you do take it out of warranty. You knew that when you circumvented the software. You knew that Apple products are usually a closed system. You knew you were not doing something sanctioned with the software. You knew the risks but wanted to try it anyways. Apple’s warranty, like most others, does include:

This warranty does not apply: (a) to damage caused by use with non-Apple products; (b) to damage caused by accident, abuse, misuse, flood, fire, earthquake or other external causes; (c) to damage caused by operating the product outside the permitted or intended uses described by Apple; (d) to damage caused by service (including upgrades and expansions) performed by anyone who is not a representative of Apple or an Apple Authorized
Service Provider (“AASP”); (e) to a product or part that has been modified to alter functionality or capability without the written permission of Apple; (f) to consumable parts, such as batteries, unless damage has occurred due to a defect in materials or workmanship; (g) to cosmetic damage, including but not limited to scratches, dents and broken plastic on ports; or (h) if any Apple serial number has been removed or defaced.

(From http://www.apple.com/legal/warranty/.)

I wish Apple provided a proper SDK. I wish that the apps were based on open standards. But the reality is that iPhone users bought into a ecosystem willingly, accepted multiple terms of use and warranties, and understood that they could damage their hardware or render their phone incompatible with AT&T.

If what you want is the latest and greatest hardware, multiple carrier support, and an open platform: I challenge you to build your own phone. If you’ve reverse engineered the iPhone (or a Blackberry or a Treo or a ________) you pretty much know what’s required to build a phone. Go and design your concept phone, build a prototype, get someone to build it. You want something sleek and powerful? That design decision is in your hands. You want open software standards and a great user interface? Don’t complain: build it. With all the talent in the Web 2.0 arena you would think that people would be generally resourceful enough to build the most killer phone that ever existed. Multitouch, voice recognition and dictation, high resolution displays, slider keypads, normal earphone jacks, visual voicemail on the phone with a companion Web 2.0 website, any audio/video CODEC …

Why not have a contest and the winner gets a contract with some electronics manufacturer?

or the Meizu miniOne:

On the surface they look cool, and they even seem to do many of the functions that the iPhone does, but the one thing they lack is something that is almost impossible to copy: class.

The iPhone, or Apple for that matter, represents more than an amalgamation of silicon, metal, and plastic. It represents a complete rethink of how people use user interfaces on small devices. Of course the consumer wants features and flexibility and battery life (which, of course, I do too) but there is a palpable “feel” of the device which cannot be denied. The iPhone feels “slick”, “friendly”, “snappy”. It seeks to impress you with the little things that it enables, like talking on the phone, sliding over to the web to get some info (while talking), and then composing an e-mail to your boss while still on said call. And when the call is done, things slide neatly back into place. Fade and swoosh. It is “simple”, “elegant”, and “tidy”. The point is: you can only copy this after you’ve seen it.

The Chinese knock-offs do indeed harken back to the not-so-long-ago era of Japanese and Korean knock-offs. To be fair, Asian countries have traditionally had a tough time being innovative probably due to cultural concerns if not general economic constraints. So, in a way, copies do represent a best effort and trying to make the best of a difficult situation. Still the copies feel like they lack something. I almost feel that Apple went with the one-button (technically 5 if you count the side buttons) interface so that they could release a limited set of software features, let the world experience it and try to copy it, and then wallop us with a more intense set of features. Kind of like saying, “ha ha! You thought you had us! Well think again!” And this strategy, I believe, does work. Well, to some extent.

The trouble is that people are getting smart and they’re learning how to innovate themselves. Copying is one way you learn. (I copy sample code I find on Internet tutorials so I can bootstrap my projects, and then after I’ve thought about things do I start to make fundamental adjustments and improvements. I think a lot of us do that since it leverages the open knowledge of others.) And then there comes the tipping point where you have enough technology that you can focus your brain on really cranking out new and unique things. China is at that cusp and probably only held back by its culture and government.

Chinese products, IMO, have always been cheap on the quality aspect. Did they have to be? Well, that’s an argument, but I’ll take the stance that yes they had to be in order for the common Chinese consumer to be able to afford them on meager earnings. Of course, selling the cheap products to non-Chinese buyers greatly helps to increase the cash flow. Will there come a time when quality does come to those products? It eventually happened to Japan. It has recently happened to Korea.

Turning our thoughts to Korea (since we now know Japan has quality products) do they now have innovative products? Sure. Quality? My old Samsung phone served me quite well until I dropped it the 10th time. Well, the software could have been a lot better on it too.

I think that if things continue the way they are with China that in the next 10 years we’ll see a vast improvement in the quality of the physical parts of Chinese products. Sooner than that, maybe in the next 5 years after that we’ll see a vast improvement in the software quality too. The government is still trying to control information but people are starting to get really crafty about how to get the Internet into their homes and that means once the dam breaks that a whole new generation of people are going to get smart. And once that generation really learns how to leverage code (if it hasn’t happened already) then real innovative development houses will be established. And once those houses are cranking out quality, tested code then the artists will come and really give it a polished feel. It’s not that far away.

The question remains: can Apple (or Silicon Valley) continue to out-innovate everyone else? I’m not so sure. I almost think there’s is a plateau you reach where you have so much knowledge learning more becomes rather pointless—unless you’re an academic. That baseline plateau will eventually be reached by many many locations around the world so that becomes the standard level. Then what? I think that then the human relationships factor will enter into the equation.

That’s one of the reasons I still live here in Silicon Valley. Where else can you go to a party and share a drink with so many entrepreneurs? Or walk to work passing so many companies? Or just by working at your job meet people that are so influential? I think that what we become is not thousands of little smart brains but one much larger smart shared brain. In the contest to one-up each other we often ally and partner with others and try to leverage shared expertise. Can China do that? In the underground sure it’s happening but what about in an open, public way? I don’t know. That’s something to read about.

(All of these were taken with either a Canon G2, Canon SD550, or Canon SD600.)