Reuters: Cheaper iPhone story withdrawn after 'substantial changes' to China report - Page 2

High profile bogus Apple rumors have a fairly well-known cast of perpetrators. Wasn't Gene Munster the first to pipe up on this one? 

What Phil said: "Despite the popularity of cheap smartphones, this will never be the future of Apple’s products ..."

What Phil didn't say: " ... outside the People's Republic of China."

What he meant: "We might need to make a cheaper iPhone specifically for China Mobile, that only runs on their proprietary 3G-variant network, in order to get them to sign a deal. Don't get your hopes up, Western cheapskates. It will only run on China Mobile's network."

What I say: "And it would be worth it. Vastly increased China market share, hundreds of millions more iOS / iCloud users. Zero gray market cannibalization of the 'expensive' iPhone models."

You mean like the iPad mini?

You and I are never going to agree on this processor issue. Fine.

You said yourself on the other thread Apple could handle Mac-like 6 month upgrades without re-branding the hardware every time. And those Mac upgrades were for small feature bumps to things like the processors.

So if Apple does as you suggest with the iPad family, wouldn't they do it with the iPhone family? In which case how would they distinguish the flagship iPhone from the last two year's budget iPhones? It's easy with the iPad mini -- it looks different. You see the reason to spend more or less.

I don't gloss over the processors at all in my list. I focus on the major improvements that compel most users to upgrade. And the main items are usually features -- the ones Apple targets. The 3G added 3G but little else. The 3G and 3GS were virtually identical, but the "S" stands for speed as marketed by Apple. And it was only a marginal improvement, but Apple promoted he hell out of it, knowing that the 2 year contracts on the original 2G phones were expiring and those users would all upgrade to get the 3G alone. Any speed bump was a bonus, but substantial compared to the original pokey little processor. In fact those three are a perfect example of distinguishing a choice had they been offered as they are today -- 2G-free, 3G-mid, 3GS high. The 4 was marketed almost exclusively as a retina display device. That was the reason to upgrade. And it was sexy. And it had a flash, and it was faster. Obvious distinction. When the 4S replaced it, it offered high speed HSPA+. It wasn't just faster internally, it offered access to faster Internet speeds the 4 doesn't! Likewise for the 5. There are arguably not a lot of reasons to upgrade other than it offers 4G LTE and the 4S just doesn't. But lets say your satisfied with AT&T pseudo 4G, they also offer a bigger screen!! And a faster processor to boot. There's a clear distinction for the consumer. If the next gen iPhone is essentially a "5S", what will distinguish it? Merely that it has a faster processor? Just how fast does a phone need to be, especially when battery life must be considered? That's when the distinction breaks down. That's when the choice between the 5 & the "5S" becomes confusing. Not to mention a "6".

I'm not saying a new processor doesn't warrant an upgrade along with all the other minor improvements, but if its not a distinct choice for the consumer, most will opt to save $100. All I'm saying is when you have three generations of LTE technology for sale at once, and the only major difference between them is processor speed, then it seems to me Apple's current marketing strategy will not be as effective. S why not take a page from the iPad marketing and introduce a dedicated mini?

 

But that's not… It doesn't have to be. Why does it have to be last year's crap just because it's smaller? The iPhone makes sense: it's literally last year's device, cheaper. The iPad: it's two sizes, one with new hardware, the other "new" with old hardware.

 

Good. That's Apple's point. Buy the expensive one. And people actually think we need a cheaper iPhone?! HA!

 

That's only because you're calling 2 to 3x improvement "marginal". 

so lemme tell you what's coming: the iPhone touch!

essentially the iPod touch + cellphone. $200 less than the iPhone but with same profit margin. so subsidized contract price is $50 or even "free." and no more discounted older iPhones instead.

coming this Spring.

I see processor speed in the context that retina displays have been debated around here, especially with regard to the iPad mini. How much faster the processor is matters only as much as the final user experience. If the overall experience on the iPad mini is good, then it doesn't matter if the display isn't exactly retina. Likewise with processors. If a users general perception is good, it doesn't matter how much faster the latest processor may be. If a person doesn't need the speed, they're not going to miss it.

 

Yes, something like that.

 

Apple has noticed two things about the average Android customer:

 

They don't buy apps

They don't surf the web

 

So Apple doesn't want to get into that market. What they might do is create a market for the smart-ish phone; something that will probably use the iPod Nano as a starting point.