Nope - as long as the thing is tied to one carrier, they aren't going to really make a dent. The people who wanted the new toy bought it at the higher price. Everyone else I know is turned off by the required service, not the price of the phone.

A bit off topic, I might be interested in the iPod touch. Maybe I'll wait awhile for any bugs to be worked out.

My phone cost $20 and the service costs about $30/mo and I'm not in a contract. When Apple can meet that I'll consider it.

Unless your job requires 24/7 net/email access I think paying $400 or $700 for a phone and $100+ a month is just nuts.

I found it pretty amazing that Apple has decided, due to massive backlash from the early adopters, to credit each person that bought at the higher price $100 that can be used at the Apple store.

That might imply that they were a little greedy right up front. I have no intention of buying while it's tied to one carrier and has such expensive plans. I also may look at the Ipod Touch once they lower the price on that. (I think it's still overpriced too)

I think you guys nailed the real issue here. It isn't the price necessarily . . . it's the service requirements. Freedom and choice is always more valuable than gold -- and that is just what you stated.

Poor Apple, I think they went about it the wrong way. This would have been a SMASH HIT for them if they would have just known that having a choice of carriers would have been the cherry on top of the Sundae.

All the bells and whistles AND the freedom to boot. Yeah, that could have been their motto.

I think the iPod Touch sounds like a better deal than the iPod, since apparently it features the Safari browser and is WiFi-connected. If I can use it to do some web surfing "on the cheap" - i.e. using others' free services like Starbucks, etc. I'm almost sold once they add more memory--16GB is far too tiny for my music collection now.

That's the major reason I see to get a Touch instead of the iPhone--from what i've seen so far it's got all the browsing capabilities with none of the service charges. Seems too good to be true! How can they justify all the massive extra service charges associated with iPhone? Just for the cell service?

Really, I think what we all need is a nice UMPC like the solar-powered one this bicycling blogger is using. A teeny little energy-efficient laptop replacement, with all the memory, features, and connectivity you could want. In fact, I just checked the site and completely by accident saw there's a comparison between the UMPC and the iPod touch: http://www.umpcportal.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=859

I'm putting one of these UMPCs on my Christmas wish list.

Nope. It will come down more, and I have a different provider anyway...

I have a feeling Apple is not going to tie the iPhone to at&t for very long. I think it was just a deal to secure a strong foot in the door.

I've been waiting (patiently until this price cut) for the iPhone version 2.0. I can honestly say that the iPhone would make my life noticeably better. My current phone is nothing fancy and old (I recently had to replace the battery), which also means my contact has long expired and I'm free to change carriers. I almost always carry my iPod with me (and regret when I've left it behind since I use it to listen to the news and block out the talking of crazy people on the bus). And having the internet with me always would make navigating the city easier and allow me to know if a bus is late or if I missed it. Assuming they make the needed improvements to v2.0 (faster network, for starters) I'll be first in line.

Being locked to AT&T is also a deal killer for me. I like Verizon service and also am on a discounted plan.

I'm always interested new technology, so I was following the Apple 2.0 blog during the press conference. There were plenty of negative comments about Apple and the reduction of the iPhone's price so soon after its launch date. Of course, there were also plenty of comments saying that those who purchased the iPhone immediately after its release were owed nothing. Some of the comments were pretty amusing. My favorite: a comment in which the poster referred to those who purchased the phone right away as, "iLemmings".

I'm all over it this weekend. I'm right on the dividing line between early adopter and whatever group comes later, and this was the move I've been waiting for.

My decision was between the iPhone and the Blackberry Curve, and now the iPhone is more value.

another person here that won't switch to AT&T for it. The last person I talked to on AT&T has already switched to Verizon after not liking the service. If Apple had put the Iphone on Verizon they would have sold an amazing amount of phones and I would have one in my pocket right now. The iphone had a ton of hype but the most common remark I've heard in person is "I want one and as soon as they're on Verizon I will buy one"

Steve Jobs originally justified the price of the iPhone by adding the cost of an iPod and a phone combined in one package.

Thus the technical solution offered was for Apple's benefit only: it enabled the bundling of two devices in a single sale.

Such thinking demonstrates that Apple is far from an innovative company as is image suggests. Any device that has been converted to software no longer carries manufacturing costs (i.e. the iPod on the iPhone is no longer a distinct piece of hardware). It takes enormous greed and shortsightedness to pretend that it is still a device and not pass the cost savings to the consumer.

I must say that I am lured by the $200 price drop, but again who knows what they will be charging in a few months - I think it is worth waiting...

The only people rushing out to buy iPhones:

1. Apple fanatics
2. Rich people

I think as more software developers create more for the iPhone, thats when it will really take it.