AppleInsider AppleInsider Forums


Go Back   AppleInsider > iPhone
Register Members List New Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-03-2008, 10:45 AM   #1
AppleInsider
Kasper's Automated Slave
 
Join Date: Nov 1997
Posts: 6,151
RBC says sub-$100 "iPod phone" market up for Apple's taking

Apple could announce sales of more than 4 million 3G iPhones at its media event next week, according to investment bank RBC Capital Markets, which also suggests the company may be looking into a low cost "iPod phone" to build on its momentum.

Analyst Mike Abramsky made the comments in a research note Wednesday, saying "resilient post-launch" sell-through has paced the company ahead of Wall Street's expectations and on target with his forecast of 5.1 million 3G units in the September quarter and 14 million total iPhone units for the calendar year.

Apple plans to hold a media event next Tuesday to usher in a refreshed line of iPod digital music players and unveil new iTunes services, but may also use the forum to provide an update on iPhone 3G sales, Abramsky said. He added that the Cupertino-based company has also promised by September a new version of iPhone Software (v2.1) with system-wide push notification support and improved GPS tracking, which may also make an appearance.

The analyst also used his report to toss around the prospect of a completely new device that could be brewing at Apple, but one that he does not expect at Tuesday's event. Though unsupported by any hard evidence, Abramsky said he has reason to believe the electronics maker is exploring the possibility of an "entry level, low cost (less than $99 subsidized) prepaid iPod/phone" that would be restricted to music playback and voice calls.

Such a device would allow the company to "capture an untapped global opportunity," he said. Marketing the pre-paid handset through retail outlets worldwide would provide a residual effect that would both "boost iPhone's momentum by 50 to 100 percent" while establishing future iPhone upgrades and enhanced global Mac sales.

As is the case for the iPhone 3G, the current quarter is proving to be yet another breakout period for Mac sales. Abramsky, who previously published the most bullish known estimates for Mac sales at 3.04 million units, said he stands by that forecast, which continues to see support from his firm's proprietary data.

He sees refreshed MacBooks and MacBook Pros with "aluminum enclosures, larger multi-touch trackpads, and updated specs" arriving sometime after next week's iPod event. He also expects Apple's global PC market share to rise to 4.2 percent by next year, up from 2.9 percent in 2007.

Abramsky maintains an Outperform rating on Apple shares.
AppleInsider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 11:02 AM   #2
studiomusic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 132
An analyst that is actually sees the great future for AAPL??? And doesn't promote FUD???
He must have bought all he can of aapl and is long (as I am)!
studiomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 11:12 AM   #3
Alonso Perez
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 196
I don't see this.

A $99 iPhone with no browsing or App Store capability makes little sense to me, on at least two counts. First, it weakens the App Store. It would be like coming out with an iPod that did not connect to iTunes. Second, Apple is never a bottom feeder. Higher cost is part of the brand.

I am not saying a lower cost model is unthinkable, but I would guess a $149 price point with full App Store and browsing access. They could drop the 3G and GPS at that price, and have 4GB. But dropping the App Store makes no sense, and therefore WiFi cannot be dropped either, so therefore a browser would also be included. I would imagine basically a plastic first generation iPhone, not a nano-with-phone.
Alonso Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 11:12 AM   #4
walshbj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 502
no way.


File Encryption Tools Built Into Your Mac
walshbj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 11:12 AM   #5
wbrasington
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post
...according to investment bank RBC Capital Markets, which also suggests the company may be looking into a low cost "iPod phone" to build on its momentum.
Though unsupported by any hard evidence, Abramsky said he has reason to believe the electronics maker is exploring the possibility of an "entry level, low cost

Idiot alert, look away quickly.

The guy has no reason to believe this.
It's a dumb idea.
There is a 100% chance that Apple will say nothing about an iPod phone, a nano-phone, or anything else that resembles shooting themselves in the foot.

This guy is just saying this to get some views on his otherwise view-challenged opinion.

Idiot alert.
Nothing to see here, move along.
wbrasington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 11:13 AM   #6
dizzy13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Miami
Posts: 67
I don't think apple is ready for another phone. I mean iPods are like what 10 years old now, I think at some point we will see various types of iPhones, but not yet and not until they work out all the kinks thats for sure!
dizzy13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 11:18 AM   #7
paxman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alonso Perez View Post
A $99 iPhone with no browsing or App Store capability makes little sense to me, on at least two counts. First, it weakens the App Store. It would be like coming out with an iPod that did not connect to iTunes. Second, Apple is never a bottom feeder. Higher cost is part of the brand.

I am not saying a lower cost model is unthinkable, but I would guess a $149 price point with full App Store and browsing access. They could drop the 3G and GPS at that price, and have 4GB. But dropping the App Store makes no sense, and therefore WiFi cannot be dropped either, so therefore a browser would also be included. I would imagine basically a plastic first generation iPhone, not a nano-with-phone.
I don't know... I can see a $99 iPhone Nano. Just an iPod and a phone. That makes sense. All the other stuff is undoubtedly cool but riding on the crest of the iPhone media wave Apple might sell a ton of smaller devices. The issue may be more the iPod than the iPhone here. I think there is a very large number of people out there who carry a basic phone and an iPod and who either don't want the added services, or can't afford the very high cost of ownership.

Many of these people may be future iPhone users so giving them a taste of the experience makes sense (to me).
paxman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 11:38 AM   #8
charlituna
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alonso Perez View Post
A $99 iPhone with no browsing or App Store capability makes little sense to me, on at least two counts.
agreed. part of the point of the iphone is that it is 3 devices in one.

1. an ipod
2. a phone
3. an internet device.

if you take out #3, you have anyone of a dozen or more music playing cell phones. big deal.

I think that this guy is dropping the ball on that prediction. I don't see it happening.

now what I can see is that in a year or so when the cost of the components comes down, the 8Gig phone could do down another $50-100 in price, along with the introduction of a 32Gig model. but I don't see anything of this nature coming up this month, even as an announcement
charlituna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 11:38 AM   #9
Cory Bauer
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 861
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post
I don't know... I can see a $99 iPhone Nano. Just an iPod and a phone. That makes sense.
It does make sense in that there's a ton of people who would love to have a phone that doesn't suck, but don't want or need a $30/mo data plan (a mandate for all current iPhone owners). Plus, in light of recent news, AT&T's 3G networks probably couldn't support the influx of new users a $99 iPhone would bring. That said, I don't see an iPhone Nano breaking compatibility or usability with current iPhone apps; for example, it couldn't have a smaller, lower resolution screen.
Cory Bauer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 11:41 AM   #10
charlituna
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by dizzy13 View Post
I don't think apple is ready for another phone. I mean iPods are like what 10 years old now, I think at some point we will see various types of iPhones, but not yet and not until they work out all the kinks thats for sure!

i agree with your basic point, even if you are off about the age of the ipod (they were introduced in Oct 2001).

I suspect in fact that getting the kinks out is part of the reason for restricting service to one network. the other reason being money (seems that ATT footed part of the development deal in exchange for their exclusivity).
charlituna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 11:46 AM   #11
iVlad
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Reston, VA
Posts: 367
Red face

I do agree that another Apple Phone will be here soon, but its not gonna be next week. Apple makes very small yet smart transitions. After first iPod, it took Apple three years to introduce iPod Mini. Since the game is much more harsh now and faster, I think new iPhone Mini, Nano, Small or (Insert New Apple Brand Name Here) is due pretty soon.

Apple needs to establish iPhone to be very stable and very popular first.
Its getting there.
iVlad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 11:48 AM   #12
Mr Underhill
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: England UK
Posts: 200
If it was just an iphone/ipod then it would rely on a phone contract or PAYG to use it. So for it to do well it would need to be free with cheaper tariffs.

In the UK i can't see how a smaller, less featured Nano Phone for free would entice many buyers. At £99/£30 per month its bigger brother is already value enough. I can't see Apple mudying the water at this early stage.


Last edited by Mr Underhill; 09-03-2008 at 11:49 AM.. Reason: my bad
Mr Underhill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 11:52 AM   #13
Takeo
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 158
I don't know what you're all talking about... I'd buy such a phone on pay-go in a heartbeat. I don't need or want a phone that can do everything but the dishes.
Takeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 12:00 PM   #14
aaarrrgggh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Paradise
Posts: 399
Curious how Apple could add value to that market space. Sure, the brand would sell, but I can't think of much they could do in a "visionary" way with a iPod phone.

You could do something with easy music capability, better camera, and an easy-to-use phone, but I have trouble it could be more appealing to "those masses" than the RAZR-- it's people that don't understand the importance of the software, and just count features.

I do still wish Apple went the MVNO route though rather than making deals with AT&T.
aaarrrgggh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 12:07 PM   #15
emulator
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 115
They will have to move in the prepaid segment someday and a $400-500 phone would do nothing there.
emulator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 12:10 PM   #16
solipsism
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Ansible
Posts: 11,777
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post
I don't know... I can see a $99 iPhone Nano. Just an iPod and a phone. That makes sense. All the other stuff is undoubtedly cool but riding on the crest of the iPhone media wave Apple might sell a ton of smaller devices. The issue may be more the iPod than the iPhone here. I think there is a very large number of people out there who carry a basic phone and an iPod and who either don't want the added services, or can't afford the very high cost of ownership.

Many of these people may be future iPhone users so giving them a taste of the experience makes sense (to me).
On many counts I wouldn't I wouldn't have agreed until thinking about a little more.

First ,it occurred to me that using the iPod's menu for making a call would from the address book would be very easy to use, except for the off times that I need to dial the number directly. A clickwheel would be cumbersome for finding numbers and putting in text for SMS.

Then I wondered how an iPod Nano-like phone could make calls. I don't think you can have a proper number pad or a touch screen that forgoes the clickwheel for this type of phone. But then I thought about the 4G Nano needing to have dynamic buttons that visible change when you alter the orientation of the device for playing video.

So that leads me to a possible solution of Apple using a dynamically displayed clickwheel that will register inputs from multiple points. when used as a number/keypad.

I'm not exactly suggesting that Apple follow Nokia's circular number pad route, like in the 3560 (below), but that the the clickwheel could be a rectangle on the iPod instead of a circle, but with the center replaced with the button like all the Nanos and other Pods before it. It doesn't change the usage in your pocket for selecting music as it still has the button to hone in on to find the controls but offers more features.



(This has just been a quick brainstorm as to how I think it could happen based on the info at hand. This in o way implies what I think will happen next Tuesday or in the future. The article is dead on about there being a market segment out there that wants to consolidate their phone and iPod without getting too advanced, having the internet in their pocket or paying the associated data fees for it. If you have a better idea please post it.)


Do your part to clean up AppleInsider forums: User CP » Edit Ignore List » Teckstud
solipsism is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 12:12 PM   #17
jfanning
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 794
Quote:
Originally Posted by emulator View Post
They will have to move in the prepaid segment someday and a $400-500 phone would do nothing there.
Why would it do nothing here?
jfanning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 12:20 PM   #18
awmawm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post
agreed. part of the point of the iphone is that it is 3 devices in one.

1. an ipod
2. a phone
3. an internet device.

if you take out #3, you have anyone of a dozen or more music playing cell phones. big deal.

I think that this guy is dropping the ball on that prediction. I don't see it happening.

now what I can see is that in a year or so when the cost of the components comes down, the 8Gig phone could do down another $50-100 in price, along with the introduction of a 32Gig model. but I don't see anything of this nature coming up this month, even as an announcement
No 3 is great to have but strains a family's budget significantly. My daughter has a Samsung a707 that can play music. Synchronizing it is a major pain. Scrolling through music and playlists is a major pain. If there were a phone that had ipod functionality, she would jump on it in a second. As a father, I would approve it because i would not have to pay another $30 for data. She still can synchronize with "ipod phone" at home as she does now with the Samsung but with the ease of itunes. Anyone who currently has an ipod and a separate (basic) phone is a perfect candidate for such a "ipod phone" - and there are millions and millions of people in that category.
awmawm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 12:23 PM   #19
ZagMac
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeo View Post
I don't know what you're all talking about... I'd buy such a phone.
I would, too. My primary phone requirement is size. Can't stand my phone being iPhone size, Blackberry size, Google phone size, etc.

I envision always having a Touch to meet my movie, tv, music, game & email needs (bascially a tiny, lovely tablet) as well as a small mobile. Now if that small mobile happened to be a NanoPhone? Chub-city....

But not holding my breath for this to happen....
ZagMac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 12:24 PM   #20
wbrasington
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post
On many counts I wouldn't I wouldn't have agreed until thinking about a little more.

First ,it occurred to me that using the iPod's menu for making a call would from the address book would be very easy to use, except for the off times that I need to dial the number directly. A clickwheel would be cumbersome for finding numbers and putting in text for SMS.

Then I wondered how an iPod Nano-like phone could make calls. I don't think you can have a proper number pad or a touch screen that forgoes the clickwheel for this type of phone. But then I thought about the 4G Nano needing to have dynamic buttons that visible change when you alter the orientation of the device for playing video.

So that leads me to a possible solution of Apple using a dynamically displayed clickwheel that will register inputs from multiple points. when used as a number/keypad.

I'm not exactly suggesting that Apple follow Nokia's circular number pad route, like in the 3560 (below), but that the the clickwheel could be a rectangle on the iPod instead of a circle, but with the center replaced with the button like all the Nanos and other Pods before it. It doesn't change the usage in your pocket for selecting music as it still has the button to hone in on to find the controls but offers more features.



(This has just been a quick brainstorm as to how I think it could happen based on the info at hand. This in o way implies what I think will happen next Tuesday or in the future. The article is dead on about there being a market segment out there that wants to consolidate their phone and iPod without getting too advanced, having the internet in their pocket or paying the associated data fees for it. If you have a better idea please post it.)
Now that's a gawd-awful lookin phone that SJ could REALLY make fun of......
wbrasington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 12:31 PM   #21
wbrasington
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post
The article is dead on about there being a market segment out there that wants to consolidate their phone and iPod without getting too advanced, having the internet in their pocket or paying the associated data fees for it. If you have a better idea please post it.
While there is a market for that, there are tons of phones on the market already that combine just a simple phone and your music.

Why Apple would bother to go backward and go after that market that has a lot of competition (and basically no prophets) is beyond me.

People who want to combine their music and simple phone that has no data plan already can.
They don't need an Apple branded product with neither a clean touch screen nor a clean click wheel but rather some mish-mash combination.

We will continue to hear about the nano-phone forever.
That's because they aren't going to build one, and that will mean people can keep saying it.

A better idea? There isn't one. Apple has the best on the table and is running with it.

My speculation on what they WILL do is focus on the next higher up market, and make the iPhone as is their low-end product. (people can say it becomes the nano-phone, it's just the classic iPhone to me)
wbrasington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 12:31 PM   #22
jfanning
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 794
Quote:
Originally Posted by awmawm View Post
No 3 is great to have but strains a family's budget significantly. My daughter has a Samsung a707 that can play music. Synchronizing it is a major pain. Scrolling through music and playlists is a major pain. If there were a phone that had ipod functionality, she would jump on it in a second. As a father, I would approve it because i would not have to pay another $30 for data. She still can synchronize with "ipod phone" at home as she does now with the Samsung but with the ease of itunes. Anyone who currently has an ipod and a separate (basic) phone is a perfect candidate for such a "ipod phone" - and there are millions and millions of people in that category.
There are a lot of phones available that do this as well, Nokia have a Multimedia transfer utility available for the Mac that will transfer iTunes playlists (excluding the DRM infected files), and photos to iPhoto
jfanning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 12:40 PM   #23
solipsism
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Ansible
Posts: 11,777
Quote:
Originally Posted by wbrasington View Post
While there is a market for that, there are tons of phones on the market already that combine just a simple phone and your music.

Why Apple would bother to go backward and go after that market that has a lot of competition (and basically no prophets) is beyond me.
True and true, but remember that despite more and more phones being able to play music people are still preferring their iPod for this task. Be it style, look, feel, usage, familiarity, it still reigns supreme. As for going backwards, one could say that about the Mini or the Shuffle coming to market. For me personally, the original iPod was too large; the Mini was perfect for my arm for gym use. That is until the Nano came out. That us until the 2G Shuffle came out.


Do your part to clean up AppleInsider forums: User CP » Edit Ignore List » Teckstud
solipsism is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 12:43 PM   #24
ncee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New England
Posts: 480
aPhone and ONLY aphone

I still say … a phone and nothing but a phone, and at $80.00 price range, and they will not be able to keep up with the demand!

And now, many more folks will have their feet wet, and want to trade-up to the iPhone 3G (or 4G by the time they up-grade).

This will not hurt the sells of the iPhone, and those who are winning to pay $199.00 - $399.00 for a phone that does all that the iPhone does, will still do so.

But man it will KILL the rest of the market … big time!

A iPhone mini

- No Music
- No internet
- No Mail
- No Games
- No downloading
- No anything BUT a phone!

Hell, make it in colors JUST for kids … can you imagine how many MILLIONS will be in Xmas stocking … if kids wait until then to get one.

And there might be a way for apple to sell this via ANY vendor / source i.e., Verizon, ATT, US Cellular, Apple Stores, Apple online …

Skip
ncee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 01:05 PM   #25
awmawm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post
There are a lot of phones available that do this as well, Nokia have a Multimedia transfer utility available for the Mac that will transfer iTunes playlists (excluding the DRM infected files), and photos to iPhoto
You are right, there are utilities that attempt to synchronize phones with itunes. I do not know how well Nokia's transfer utility integrates with itunes but have tried the ones for Sony Ericsson and Samsung phones with varying success. They are not true plug-and-play with itunes and the end result is still having a phone that does not even come close to ipods in terms of ease of use to play music. That's why my daughter continues to carry her ipod next to her Samsung phone even though the Samsung device could play all her songs, too. Among her friends (apart from the ones where the parents gave into the iphone and are willing to fork over $30/month for data), most of them carry a phone and a separate ipod, too (yes, a few of them even carry a Zune! )
awmawm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 01:08 PM   #26
Cubert
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 472
"entry level, low cost (less than $99 subsidized) prepaid iPod/phone that would be restricted to music playback and voice calls."

I doubt it. Apple doesn't release low grade (ie. feature poor) versions of their products. I guess the only exception to this would be the iPod shuffle.
Cubert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 01:10 PM   #27
SpamSandwich
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 8,453
What makes sense is offering ALL iPods (except for the shuffle) with WiFi.


"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground."
—Thomas Jefferson


Proud AAPL stock owner.
SpamSandwich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 01:17 PM   #28
Booga
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Tinton Falls, NJ
Posts: 702
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubert View Post
"entry level, low cost (less than $99 subsidized) prepaid iPod/phone that would be restricted to music playback and voice calls."

I doubt it. Apple doesn't release low grade (ie. feature poor) versions of their products. I guess the only exception to this would be the iPod shuffle.
The iPod Shuffle, the Mac Mini, the MacBook, ... in fact Apple does this all the time.

The thing keeping them from doing this isn't the "low-end" thing, it's the "low-margin" thing. Apple is a value-add company, not a compete-on-price company like Dell. Apple looks for the packages that people are willing to pay extra for and bundle them.

If they did something innovative with your standard address book, calendar, ringtones, and visual voicemail and integrated it with iTunes but left EVERYTHING else off they'd probably still sell an awful lot of them at higher margins than everyone else.
Booga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 01:19 PM   #29
solipsism
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Ansible
Posts: 11,777
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booga View Post
The iPod Shuffle, the Mac Mini, the MacBook, ... in fact Apple does this all the time.

The thing keeping them from doing this isn't the "low-end" thing, it's the "low-margin" thing. Apple is a value-add company, not a compete-on-price company like Dell. Apple looks for the packages that people are willing to pay extra for and bundle them.

If they did something innovative with your standard address book, calendar, ringtones, and visual voicemail and integrated it with iTunes but left EVERYTHING else off they'd probably still sell an awful lot of them at higher margins than everyone else.
Great point!


Do your part to clean up AppleInsider forums: User CP » Edit Ignore List » Teckstud
solipsism is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 01:24 PM   #30
Bageljoey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jersey (new)
Posts: 1,001
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncee View Post
I still say … a phone and nothing but a phone, and at $80.00 price range, and they will not be able to keep up with the demand!

. . .

A iPhone mini

- No Music- No internet
- No Mail
- No Games
- No downloading
- No anything BUT a phone!
I can't for the life of me figure why Aapple would do a phone without music. I just can't.



Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Bageljoey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 02:19 PM   #31
nofear1az
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Arizona
Posts: 123
It could happen...sometime down in the future... I think it's too early for Apple to be introducing a another new phone so early. Actually, I think it's too early for AT&T too. anyway, just like before AT&T usually prepares for such a big Apple release like they've done with the iPhone. Vacation freezes for AT&T employees, hiring temps to handle the oncalls, etc, etc.... I didn't hear a peep so I call -F A I L on this analyst.
nofear1az is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 02:30 PM   #32
Esteban
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 50
Inconceivable

I can't imagine a future phone product from Apple that doesn't have app store compatibility. I really don't expect to see it this year, if at all, and remember this whole thread is total speculation:
"Analyst Mike Abramsky made the comments in a research note Wednesday"
This is some guy laying out scenarios for APPL's future stock price, not a tip of a product in development.

What would such a product be called? Certainly not iPhone Nano. The Nano moniker to me means smaller form factor, less storage capacity, but not crippled functionality. Should Apple market such a product, I'm still trying to imagine their upside. Either way, it would cannibalize either iPod or iPhone sales. And why would Apple want to cut off its' own revenue stream from the app store? Seems silly.

I've run through several different scenarios myself, and I keep coming to a dead end. The only thing I can come up with that makes remotely any (business) sense is a smaller version of the iPod Touch, with added phone capabilities, and maybe a horizontally sliding qwerty keyboard. Basically a smallish iPhone with no data plan. Does that sound like something Apple would do?

Makes no sense to me. but what makes even less sense to me is "nothing but a phone". That is the antithesis of what Apple is, and even the lowest end free phones these days have cameras, bluetooth, organizer, etc. Why Apple would want to enter that market is inconceivable. and yes, I know what inconceivable means.


"We have been taught to believe that negative equals realistic and positive equals unrealistic."
-Susan Jeffers
Esteban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 03:34 PM   #33
Ireland
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 8,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncee View Post

A iPhone mini

- No Music
- No internet
- No Mail
- No Games
- No downloading
- No anything BUT a phone!
No music?

What are you smoking?

Here:



Although I don't expect way cheaper than $199. It'll probably be $199 with no contract, when it gets released.


Collecting my SSD iMac Fry-die. :D
Ireland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 03:47 PM   #34
adamroth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2
It's not that Apple needs to make an iPhone nano. They need to make an iPhone "tween."

I was at a park with my 18-month old the other day, and all the 12-14 year olds had cell phones. It seems to be their life. They text, they talk, and when they're home they facebook and myspace or whatever.

Now the iPhone would be perfect for them except one thing: There's no way mom and dad will shell out $35 a month for data and SMS.

So the real trick is to make an iPhone with *limited* (but still robust) data services. Texting-check. Photos-check. Music-check. Wi-Fi, yes, but unlimited cell-data, no way. Keep the monthly cost for the data plan under $10 and mom and dad will say yes.

There's no need to change the form factor. In fact, having access to the app-store and the social networking that makes possible will be essential.

There's not millions, but 100s of millions of people for whom this would be attractive, and I bet Apple knows it.
adamroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 04:07 PM   #35
melgross
Global Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: NYC
Posts: 19,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Man, that is one ugly phone. No wonder Nokia can't sell here.
melgross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 04:11 PM   #36
solipsism
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Ansible
Posts: 11,777
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post
Man, that is one ugly phone. No wonder Nokia can't sell here.
I think they had a bunch of these around 2003 that they tried to push. I recall at least one other model with triangular, jagged numbers. They looked so unintuitive.

Besides being a phone it also disperses pills and tells you when your cycle is due.


Do your part to clean up AppleInsider forums: User CP » Edit Ignore List » Teckstud
solipsism is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 04:11 PM   #37
melgross
Global Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: NYC
Posts: 19,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by wbrasington View Post
While there is a market for that, there are tons of phones on the market already that combine just a simple phone and your music.

Why Apple would bother to go backward and go after that market that has a lot of competition (and basically no prophets) is beyond me.

People who want to combine their music and simple phone that has no data plan already can.
They don't need an Apple branded product with neither a clean touch screen nor a clean click wheel but rather some mish-mash combination.

We will continue to hear about the nano-phone forever.
That's because they aren't going to build one, and that will mean people can keep saying it.

A better idea? There isn't one. Apple has the best on the table and is running with it.

My speculation on what they WILL do is focus on the next higher up market, and make the iPhone as is their low-end product. (people can say it becomes the nano-phone, it's just the classic iPhone to me)
I'm not saying that they will come out with one, or that they won't. But there is a large market out there for Apple products these days, which is growing. I can see this selling well. Esp. to kids who want an iPod and a phone, and don't want, or can't afford (and yes, that means their parents as well) to buy both.

If predictions are true, and music players will eventually merge with phones all around, and I agree that they will, as Jobs has said about the original iPhone, Apple would prefer that they cannibalize their own product lines, rather than allowing others to do so.
melgross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 04:14 PM   #38
melgross
Global Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: NYC
Posts: 19,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubert View Post
"entry level, low cost (less than $99 subsidized) prepaid iPod/phone that would be restricted to music playback and voice calls."

I doubt it. Apple doesn't release low grade (ie. feature poor) versions of their products. I guess the only exception to this would be the iPod shuffle.
So I guess the Mac Mini, and iPod Shuffle don't really exist.
melgross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 04:18 PM   #39
solipsism
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Ansible
Posts: 11,777
Here we go...






(I like Nokia 7900, the third one)


Do your part to clean up AppleInsider forums: User CP » Edit Ignore List » Teckstud
solipsism is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 04:27 PM   #40
Constable Odo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 160
Thumbs down

Are you people trying to turn Apple into a cellphone company or what? Let Apple build a Pro (heavy duty) version iPhone for the enterprise and forget about building these $100 cellphones. You say this area is for the taking, but there's seems to be an awful lot of competition in that price range. Apple has many other areas they can profit from. A tablet computer or improve upon AppleTV. A stripped-down cellphone seems downright ridiculous for Apple to produce.
Constable Odo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.