Rumor: Alleged cheaper iPhone may feature U.S.-made chassis with "see-through" design - Page 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrrodriguez 

 

Phil didn't say no, he didn't deny the rumors, he stated that Apple doesn't make cheap products. Cheap in this definition is not in price. The lowest priced Apple product at the moment is the iPod Shuffle, at $49. The iPod Touch is $199, and it closely resembels the iPhone in terms of usability, only difference is it doesn't have a cell radio.

 

The point is there is a market for a LOW COST phone, and if Apple can deliver a phone that can access the web, access facebook and twitter, and integrates with the Apple ecosystem, then the phone will be a winner. It's a stepping stone for an iPhone.

 

I remember when I got an iPod Touch because I couldn't afford an iPhone. I think some people in third world countries might feel the same, where maybe they can't afford an iPhone yet, but they can get the highest quality "budget" phone, the iPhone mini (or nano)

Curious if you think Apple would somehow limit the services and/or user features of a less expensive iPhone? If so, in what way? I can't imagine them purposely "throttling" the usability, but maybe you or someone else might see it differently. If not then it makes an up-sell to a premium iPhone somewhat difficult doesn't it, particularly if there's a 20% or more price difference to move up one notch. Maybe not offer the current iPhone at all in some markets to avoid that issue?

Cheaper =/= cheap

Apple obviously won't make a cheap phone, but I could see them making one that's still good quality and maintains their margins, while not being as expensive as the iPhone 5. God knows they'd sell enough to offset the design costs.

EDIT: And yeah the "see-through" part is BS. Assuming this story isn't completely made up, they probably just saw a prototype part...

Two things: 

1) Apple has lots of patents for innovative carbon fibre processes that are described in exactly this way (semi-transparent, weird layers, "glass onion" appearance).  

2) On the other hand, speaking as someone who always had a transparent housing on every phone they owned before iPhone came along and took away the possibility ... only a small segment of society seems to want this.  There are always transparent housings for almost any phone available, but most people don't seem to care for them or want them.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by ifij775 

Can a prepaid phone offer apple leverage at the point of sale to undo the bias salesmen have for pushing the crap phones over iPhone?

The stores/carries makes less of prepaid phones, right? So probably not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jragosta 


That's not aluminum - that's alumina which is entirely different.

Essentially, that's like saying that you're a lump of coal because you contain carbon.

Exactly. It's entirely different from this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatorguy 

Curious if you think Apple would somehow limit the services and/or user features of a less expensive iPhone? If so, in what way? I can't imagine them purposely "throttling" the usability, but maybe you or someone else might see it differently. If not then it makes an up-sell to a premium iPhone somewhat difficult doesn't it, particularly if there's a 20% or more price difference to move up one notch. Maybe not offer the current iPhone at all in some markets to avoid that issue?

It's already happened. The iPod Nano uses an interface that is as fluid as any Apple product, but is not rich in features. An iPhone with similar limitations, but with slightly more features than a Nano, would be adequate.

I assume your 20% comment was relating to the $200 contract price point, which might be why you're having difficulties understanding the cheaper iPhone. In reality the cheapest latest gen iPhone costs $650 (retail).

If Apple were to release an iPhone that costs $200 off contract, with limited hardware specs, but still maintain a fluid and enjoyable interface, along with general functionalities of modern smartphones (GPS with Map app, 3g, web browser, limited app selection, some games even), then I believe Apple would be able to entice many low end Android smartphone users to switch to Apple. 

I must say that I just looked at this thread on another computer and saw all the automatic "link ads" placed *inside* my comments by this forum and I'm shocked.  

What kind of despicable, f*cked up website uses "VigiLink"????  

Please stop this disgusting practice immediately.  

Using Javascript to insert advertising right inside the posts made by forum members is just beyond the pale.  How long has this crap been going on?  I generally block all tracking cookies so I had not noticed until now that you a-holes were doing this.  

Absolutely disgusting.  

Originally Posted by ifij775 
Can a prepaid phone offer apple leverage at the point of sale to undo the bias salesmen have for pushing the crap phones over iPhone?

No, since nearly everywhere in the world but the US sells the iPhone on a prepaid plan already.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ireland 

For this to make sense, at least to me, the introduction of this cheaper iPhone should happen this summer, alongside the introduction of the iPhone 5S. And furthermore, the introduction will introduce a new iPhone strategy for Apple whereby as they bring out their new high end model each year they drop all older models of the iPhone completely and have the cheaper iPhone available alongside it.

So at any one time you've got the 1 latest and greatest in a few storage sizes, and one latest and cheapest in one small size. This would simplify the product lineup for people, in my mind. Do you want the 5S or the cheaper model? If you want the cheaper model, here you go, it's an 8GB phone made using clear plastic so you don't even need to choose a colour. If you want the 5S you can choose from black and white and 16-64 GB. Do you want to spend as little money on an iPhone as possible and yet still get a new iPhone? Or do you want the latest and greatest?

Many would select the cheapest... so I would expect any such phone to be sold in emerging markets only, otherwise profits will tank.

A budget phone will be sold to solidify iOS in certain markets only.  And will have to have sufficiently less features to justify the price difference from the premium phones.

Originally Posted by blackbook 
How does typing/search work on the current Nano?

You just don't. I think the voice commands from the 3rd gen iPod shuffle are there, but other than that, you don't.

Not gonna happen.

Originally Posted by blackbook 
Well Apple did get rid of the click wheel and all other buttons and made a buttonless iPod Nano before...

They technically and feasibly could do the same for an iPhone Nano.

Well, are we assuming it runs iOS or Pixo OS?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

Well, are we assuming it runs iOS or Pixo OS?

I'm just saying Apple has done crazy things before (remember the buttonless iPod shuffle?) so I wouldn't be surprised if they axed the home button on an iOS device in the near future.

Originally Posted by blackbook 
I'm just saying Apple has done crazy things before (remember the buttonless iPod shuffle?) so I wouldn't be surprised if they axed the home button on an iOS device in the near future.

Replacing it with what? The functionality is required. And take note: gestures lock up when an app does.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

Replacing it with what? The functionality is required. And take note: gestures lock up when an app does.

True. But Apple is moving forward and the home button isn't going to be there forever. I'm sure they're figuring out solutions for the iOS post-home button.

There have been some good ideas communicated on the forums such as turning the whole front panel into a "trackpad-esque" button, that would be firm enough not to accidentally be triggered when using the screen, but function as the home button when the lower part of the screen panel is pressed.

Of course Apple had their solution on the 6G Nano of backward swipe. On an iPhone that could be a 2 finger swipe. The iPad already has gestures that take the place of the home button.

And when gestures fail the lock button will still be there...

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilBoogie 

Not to make a point, but it's related (from the bio):
One sunny afternoon, when he wasn’t feeling well, Jobs sat in the garden behind his house and reflected on death. He talked about his experiences in India almost four decades earlier, his study of Buddhism, and his views on reincarnation and spiritual transcendence. “I’m about fifty-fifty on believing in God,” he said. “For most of my life, I’ve felt that there must be more to our existence than meets the eye.”
He admitted that, as he faced death, he might be overestimating the odds out of a desire to believe in an afterlife. “I like to think that something survives after you die,” he said. “It’s strange to think that you accumulate all this experience, and maybe a little wisdom, and it just goes away. So I really want to believe that something survives, that maybe your consciousness endures.”
He fell silent for a very long time. “But on the other hand, perhaps it’s like an on-off switch,” he said. “Click! And you’re gone.”
Then he paused again and smiled slightly. “Maybe that’s why I never liked to put on-off switches on Apple devices.”

I just love Steve Jobs. What an amazing excerpt of the bio.

Originally Posted by blackbook 
True. But Apple is moving forward and the home button isn't going to be there forever.

Right, and they'll remove it when it's no longer iOS. But it's gonna be iOS for a good long while.

There's a reason the BlackBerry Storm and Storm 2 sucked so many metaphorical eggs. And it was basically that.

Not iOS. Different story. You can't assign that swipe to that function; it breaks every app ever made.

Again, breaks apps.

And I specifically stated those gestures lock up when an app locks up. So you HAVE to have a hardware "out".

Which doesn't take you out of the app, so it solves nothing. I suppose if you want to forcibly shut your device down every time an app hangs, that's one way of doing it.

It's the Windows 98 way, but it's a way.