'iPad 5' rumored to debut in Oct. with mini-like design, 'iPhone 5S' & plastic iPhone also coming... - Page 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwmac 

I hope the 4.7" iPhone+ becomes a reality. If it doesn't make an appearance then the 5S or 6 along with iOS 7 needs to really have some major new draws to keep all the 4S owners in the fold as their upgrades mature.  Apple has never faced so much tough competition as they will in 2013 from Android. Not to mention a resurgent RIM that looks to have a pretty nice OS and a nostalgic but loyal base ready to stick with Blackberry or return if given a compelling reason. 

 

A cheaper but not "cheap" iPhone also makes sense. The cheapest current new iPhone is the 8GB iPhone 4  which is still $450 - $500 depending on the country without subsidies. It is a quality phone but is perceived rightly or wrongly as old. Over 70% of the world's smartphone customers do not get any subsidy at all for a phone so they have to pay the full price. Even the U.S. has changed to an extent and has hurt Apple sales quite dramatically. If the carriers all had the same upgrade policies they had 2 or 3 years ago in place, Apple would have breezed by 50 million iPhone sales. I used to get a full upgrade every 12 months but now it is 18 months, and for some carriers 20 or 22 months. Phone geeks still upgrade often and own 3 or 4 phones, but they are a tiny minority. 

 

Apple is good at making something cheaper in price without making it cheap. Even if that means taking essentially the guts out of the 4 or 4S and putting it into a plastic case to be able to offer a phone for $350. Many parents buy their kids those low end and dirt cheap Android phones that really are complete crap. But since kids lose and break phones it is a good choice since they are easy and cheap to replace. But once those kids get used to Android or any OS they tend to stay with what is familiar and comfortable and then buy a Galaxy or other expensive Android phone later. So a cheaper iPhone could serve as a gateway drug to lock them into the ecosystem. 

Completely agree with you on everything. A cheaper phone. Can be done. Easily. And a larger phone. I need a larger phone. I rarely make calls on my iPhone, so a larger phone for computing would be perfect.

I won't buy an iPad because with LTE and 32 GB, it's WAY overpriced. Apple needs to stop gouging customers on upping the RAM and adding LTE. What a ripoff.

Disclaimer: I've been using Apple products for 30 years. And my kids and I have MacBook Pros and iPhones (4/4S).

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwmac 

Since when is turning bluetooth, wifi, or airplane on/off geeky? Anyone that uses a bluetooth headset might do that several times a day when you are trying to save every drop of battery life you can. 

No, most users really don't do that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pfisher 

Probably plastic back like the iPhone 3G/3GS. Less top-notch as an iPhone 5, but cheap to build. It's can be just about the OS.

 

no no no... are you guys blind? There's a brand new iPod touch with great margins for 329. put only 8gb, put a 3.5" retina (much cheaper), 800mhz a5 and you have an amazing new and great phone with 0 R&D, BOM of less than 160, machinery ready.

299, GREAT BUILD QUALITY, margins of more than 40%, much more marketshare so stronger ecosystem revenue. Same stuff they did with the mini.

Quote:

Originally Posted by anantksundaram 

You can be assured that if there is a cheap plastic phone, there is no way that Apple can restrict it to 'developing markets.' It'll also be the handset for kids or the less well-off in the richer countries.

 

This is a path down which Apple should not want to go, and likely will not. So I am calling b/s on that part of the rumor.

There are many ways to do that: 1) it can be a different brand name phone, say "pineapple".  The Tifanny people will pays a higher price for the personal statement whereas the walmart people can get the phone with similar functionalities; 2) network locked - China Mobile has a complete different network than the rest of world; 3) language locked - a chinese only phone.

When talking about a redesigned cheaper model I hate it when people say "they can just keep selling the iPhone 4 / 4S"

The thing is, as a marketer (which I am) it is so much better to be selling a redesigned 2013 iPhone Mini than it is a 2010/2011 iPhone 4/4S.

It can have the exact same chip, the exact same screen, the exact same OS, camera, the lot, but by virtue of being 'new' it will sell bucket loads more.

This is why new car models come out year after year with merely a change to the headlight shape or the front grill... the fact that it is different to the last years model, no matter that it is a minor change and simply cosmetic guarantees enhanced sales.

I understand this as a marketer and a consumer, I am not sure why so many people on this site miss it entirely.

An iPhone Mini (with plastic shell if you like) will outsell an iPhone 4/4S with identical specs simply because it is something new for the public to fall in love with.

The general public are not technology nerds (like us) and are looking for the latest product (not necessarily the best specs) at an affordable price, that looks attractive, works as advertised and fulfils the needs they have for purchasing the product: surfing the web, taking photos, making calls.

An iPhone Mini meets these criteria an iPhone 4/4S does not.

Of course Apple can further enhance the Mini's attractiveness by upping select specs above the 4/4S but it should be noted that this is not necessary for success but would help shift additional units if the price remained reasonable.

Someone please repost my thoughts in rebuttal the next time this argument evolves because I am tired of seeing it made and not refuted.

Quote:

Originally Posted by anonymouse 

 

No, most users really don't do that.

Everyone I know that has an android phone (the ones that Apple is after) do that.

Originally Posted by lghulm 

It can have the exact same chip, the exact same screen, the exact same OS, camera, the lot, but by virtue of being 'new' it will sell bucket loads more. This is why new car models come out year after year with merely a change to the headlight shape or the front grill... 

I understand this as a marketer and a consumer, I am not sure why so many people on this site miss it entirely.

That's because this doesn't work in the tech industry. As a marketer, you should know this.

The GT120 didn't sell well. With good reason; it was a rebranded 9400 GT, which itself was a rebranded 8-… what, −800 GT(?).

The iPhones 4/S already do that.

Nonsense. Make a phone call with it. Put it in your pocket.

One is a tablet. One is a phone. They have nothing to do with one another.

Originally Posted by AppleInsider 

Horwitz speculated that Apple will have to adopt new screen technology, like Sharp's IGZO panels, in order to achieve the "noticeably thinner" design he saw, which he characterized as a "stretched iPad mini."

New screen technology is probably essential to reducing iPad size now (and iPhone size later.)  More efficient electronics and / or more efficient battery technology are the other two ways.  Apple is probably working on all three, but I'd guess that IGZO will make the biggest difference in energy efficiency.  IGZO conductors are 40 times more efficient than amorphous silicon conductors, and more transparent as well.  The "invisible wires" will need less power and will require less backlighting to achieve the same brightness.

Originally Posted by AppleInsider 

The report also made mention of a new iPhone with a plastic body that would be targeted at emerging markets like China.

 

If Apple really wanted to, they could cut a deal with China Mobile with the iPhone 5 and the rumored low-cost iPhone.  And how could Apple prevent gray market cannibalization, world-wide?  By making the low-cost iPhone China Mobile-only.  China Mobile uses an oddball 3G variant that is incompatible with everyone else's 3G implementation.  So a phone built specifically for CM won't work anywhere else.  Zero gray market.

 

But does Apple really want to do that?  Especially since we're eventually going to see "real 4G," which will replace the current LTE and HSPA+, which are still just legacy 3G-based technologies.  Apple and China Mobile might just be dawdling until the "real 4G" spec is finalized, then rolled out around the world.  Could take years.  If so, maybe the China Mobile-only low-cost iPhone would make sense.

 

Originally Posted by AppleInsider 

Finally, it was also mentioned that the so-called "iPhone Math" detailed in a report earlier this week may have been given its bizarre rumored name because of a mistranslation. It was instead suggested to Horwitz that the test device, which purportedly features a 4.7-inch screen, may instead be known as an "iPhone +" ? a device that may not make it to market, but was characterized as a "plan B" for Apple against big-screen Android handsets.

Apple has a long history of creating internal test products.  Many of which are never released as products.  This just might be one of them.

Originally Posted by AppleInsider 

Friday's report largely aligns with what analyst Ming-chi Kuo of KGI Securities shared with AppleInsider last week. The analyst, who has a respectable track record in predicting Apple's future product plans, indicated that Apple plans to release a new "iPhone 5S," along with a redesigned iPhone 5, in the third quarter of 2013.

 

Tick (3G). Tock (3GS).

Tick (4). Tock (4S).

Tick (5). Tock ___ ?  

Fill in the blank.

Originally Posted by AppleInsider 

Around the same time he also expects Apple to debut a redesigned fifth-generation iPad, as well as a second-generation iPad mini with a high-resolution Retina display.

 

Same deal.  A Retina iPad mini, with reasonable pricing and same or slimmer form factor, needs IGZO technology in its screen.

Just FYI: IGZO can be used in OLED screens as well as LCD screens.  IGZO is just a (very efficient) transparent conductor material.

When talking about a redesigned cheaper model I hate it when people say "they can just keep selling the iPhone 4 / 4S"

The thing is, as a marketer (which I am) it is so much better to be selling a redesigned 2013 iPhone Mini than it is a 2010/2011 iPhone 4/4S.

It can have the exact same chip, the exact same screen, the exact same OS, camera, the lot, but by virtue of being 'new' it will sell bucket loads more.

This is why new car models come out year after year with merely a change to the headlight shape or the front grill... the fact that it is different to the last years model, no matter that it is a minor change and simply cosmetic guarantees enhanced sales.

I understand this as a marketer and a consumer.

An iPhone Mini (with plastic shell if you like) will outsell an iPhone 4/4S with identical specs simply because it is something new for the public to fall in love with.

The general public are not technology nerds (like us) and are looking for the latest product (not necessarily the best specs) at an affordable price, that looks attractive, works as advertised and fulfils the needs they have for purchasing the product: surfing the web, taking photos, making calls.

An iPhone Mini meets these criteria an iPhone 4/4S does not.

Of course Apple can further enhance the Mini's attractiveness by upping select specs above the 4/4S but it should be noted that this is not necessary for success but would help shift additional units if the price remained reasonable.

Originally Posted by SockRolid 

Tick (3G). Tock (3GS).

Tick (4). Tock (4S).

Tick (5). Tock _6_ ?  

Fill in the blank.

😈

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackbook 

Only thing that makes sense is the iPhone 5S which we all already knew was coming.

 

iPad 5? Some of what he said makes sense, but I don't think Apple is going to ditch the bezels, unless the iPad 5 is as light as the Mini (not likely).

 

Plastic iPhone? No.

 

iPhone +? "Plan B" against Android? Now he's just making stuff up.

I think we're all assuming when the analyst said it looks like a "stretched iPad Mini" he means including the bezels.  But I think the opposite.  I could see Apple reducing the bezels a LITTLE bit, but not a lot.  I personally like the current bezels and it makes a lot of sense that they are about the average width of your thumbs.

About the plastic iPhone.  I doubt it now that every iDevice Apple makes is metal unibody.  That being said, I am one of the few left that really loved the form factor of the iPhone 3G(S).  I still use mine when I travel overseas, and every time I pick it up, it instantly feels more comfortable and more natural to hold in my hand.  I even remember how SJ pointed this out in the Keynote when he launched the 3G. I think he said something like "how wonderful it feels in your hand".  The 4 and the 5's just feel cold and rigid.  I'd love to see them update the form factor for a "lower priced" iphone to be something more like a hybrid of the iphone 3G(S) and the current Gen iPod Touch/iPad Mini.  Maybe a tad thicker.  I love the design, just not as comfortable to hold.

As a side note.  I love my MBP, but i hate the sharp edge next to the trackpad.  Just not comfortable either.  Looks beautify but not ergonomic.

About "Plan B".  This has got to be a test model Apple has made, just in case they want to.  Could be that it was a test model from when they were dev'ing the iPhone 5.  Playing with screen sizes and shapes...I'm sure Team Ive has about a dozen test models like this.  Personally I'd rather they stick with a 4:3 display for the iP5, but i can see the ergonomics of the solution.  So, if we see a larger screen, it might not be the iPhone, it could be a future iPod touch.  I've always said the Touch is never going to be an iPhone, so why try to copy it?  Sure, economy of scale and production, but for what most use them for, makes more sense for them to be a tad bigger screen.

No Tallest Ski the 4/4S doesn't do all that I mentioned.

I specifically said that it needed to be new!

The GT item you are talking about.. I presume you are referring to a graphics card? Your example does not apply because it is referring to an item which is sold to nerds, I am particularly addressing items sold to the general public.

Even the most successful "add on" graphics card sells in the what, tens? hundreds of thousands? they are not at the level of a mass-market consumer mobile.

To restate it for you -> you will not get the sales from a 3 year old phone that you would from a brand new phone with the same specs at the same price.

BTW in my post when I referred to the "Mini" I was referring to the hypothetical new iPhone (like the rest of the post) not the iPad Mini, so your last point is redundant.

My final note - you refer to iPhone sales as the "tech industry" - it is not.

The tech industry is computer parts, do it yourself media servers, app programming, nerdy stuff.

The reason Apple is successful is that take items that had previously only existed as part of the tech industry and transformed them into consumer items, items that have lost all their techyness.

When sold to the average consumer the specs have melted away and the consumer is merely consuming the product for its function in their life: playing games, listening to music, staying in touch with friends -> as these functions exist outside of the tech industry so to do the products that enable their fulfilment.

Tech purchases do not meet this criteria ->those that play with "tech" do so to fulfill a range of other criteria often not solely derived from its function. 

An example would be buying computer parts to build a computer ->many do this out of personal pride and interest, or in a competitive or creative spirit which is quiet separate to an ordinary consumers desire to merely "game".

Whether I am right or wrong I tell you I am at least expressing to you Apples methodology and their own thinking - as an administrator on an Apple focussed site I would have thought that you would have a better grasp of Apple products.

Quote:

Originally Posted by umrk_lab 

no plastic, no fragile material, please .... I want something ROBUST

 

A bit like Klingon design :

 

 

 

Speck makes cases in this nature:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apple ][ 

I don't know about that prediction chart.

 

Does it makes sense for Apple to release basically everything in Q3? I mean, it's not like we're likely to run into any supply or production issues right? Because that certainly hasn't happened before. Just for the sake of conversation, let's say that the chart is real.

 

So basically, there aint crap happening in Q1 and Q2. And when Q3 comes, everything will get updates, and Apple won't be selling as much as they can, because supply will be constrained and production not fully ramped up. So what is there to look forward to then, from an investor's point of view? I can already see the headlines that I'll be reading in the coming months and for 2013.

I agree.  There must be something left for them to update.

My prediction, we'll see something in Q2.  I for one am surprised we haven't seen any invites for a keynote yet.  The Apple TV needs some kind of update (please let it be an updated universal remote and an App store...or at least add Amazon Instant to it).

If the "Lower Cost" iPhone debuts, we might see it in Q2 as well.  I was thinking if there was going to be a late Q1 or Q2 product launch, Apple always reserves that slot of totally new devices, and then years later will move those updates to the Q3.  Happened with the iPhone, iPad, Apple TV, then back to Q1/2.  So I think  Apple will announce/launch something soon, the question is what?

I really doubt we'll see a full HDTV from them this year, so at least an Generational Leap for the STB would be really welcomed!

Quote:

Originally Posted by pedromartins 

Everyone I know that has an android phone (the ones that Apple is after) do that.

I've known Android users (many of whom have since switched to iPhone) who've kept their WiFi switched off all the time. I know very few iPhone users, who aren't techies, who ever switch their radios off/on independently. A few may occasionally use AP mode, but nothing more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apple ][ 

I don't know about that prediction chart.

 

Does it makes sense for Apple to release basically everything in Q3? I mean, it's not like we're likely to run into any supply or production issues right? Because that certainly hasn't happened before. Just for the sake of conversation, let's say that the chart is real.

 

So basically, there aint crap happening in Q1 and Q2. And when Q3 comes, everything will get updates, and Apple won't be selling as much as they can, because supply will be constrained and production not fully ramped up. So what is there to look forward to then, from an investor's point of view? I can already see the headlines that I'll be reading in the coming months and for 2013.

If there is no new product in the near-term, the company is in trouble.  Apple needs to re-establish a dominant position in the market so that they can ask the Telcos to continue the subsidy.  If they lose the subsidy or get reduced, the entire business model will be seriously affected.  

Despite Tim Cook being a supply chain guy, the execution of the new products in the December quarter is far from ideal.  Many products, like the mini, iPhone, iMac, are constraint in the most important selling season.  On the demand side, it does not work well because the consumer wallet is limited.  Even if the world all worship Apple, and wants to contribute all their hard earned money to Apple.  There is a limit.  The company can see more demand for its products if new products are introduced around the year.  The line will be longer as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by anonymouse 

 

I've known Android users (many of whom have since switched to iPhone) who've kept their WiFi switched off all the time. I know very few iPhone users, who aren't techies, who ever switch their radios off/on independently. A few may occasionally use AP mode, but nothing more.

Even if that was true (it isn't), so what? It's an extremely useful feature that can provide a better experience.

Please, let's not be blind here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pedromartins 

Even if that was true (it isn't), so what? It's an extremely useful feature that can provide a better experience.

Please, let's not be blind here.

It is true. And it's not a "useful" feature if people don't use it. These features are gimmicks, not things that ought to be the focus of iOS development. Please, let's not be ridiculous here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sflocal 


Unless Apple has advanced alien technology that throws out basic mass/matter principles, a full-size iPad will never be as light as a mini.

Again, people taking the words too literally.  I don't believe he said as light as the iPad mini, just lighter than the iPad 2, 3 or 4..."reduced weight" were the exact words.

personally, if that lightness means no Retina, I could care less.  I love my iPad 2, never upgraded because it got noticeably heavier.  If they just made a non-retina 9.7" iPad "air" i'd be happy.  Can't do the Mini, just too small.  I actually feel the 9.7" ipad is too small but it's a good compromise.

``Quote:

Originally Posted by Apple ][ 

I don't know about that prediction chart.

 

Does it makes sense for Apple to release basically everything in Q3? I mean, it's not like we're likely to run into any supply or production issues right? Because that certainly hasn't happened before. Just for the sake of conversation, let's say that the chart is real.

 

So basically, there aint crap happening in Q1 and Q2. And when Q3 comes, everything will get updates, and Apple won't be selling as much as they can, because supply will be constrained and production not fully ramped up. So what is there to look forward to then, from an investor's point of view? I can already see the headlines that I'll be reading in the coming months and for 2013.

They could limit a entry iPhone to China Mobile radio frequencies.

Possible New Products:

• iPad Mini Retina

• Hires Touch Screen (stylus) iMac or Large Tablet
• Airport with 802.11ac
• There should be a new Mac Pro -- possibly modular & Thunderbolt 2
• Home Server (ARM)
• Revised AppleTV -- crossload apps from Home Server, iPhone, iPad and Mac.

I still think that Apple will find a way to make the iPad Mini an inexpensive, convenient and acceptable iPhone substitute -- for emerging countries, and people that need a phone, but don't make a lot of phone calls.

Possibly this could be engineered so the iPad Mini communicated via Siri and BT with something that contains a few buttons, a speaker and a mic... something inexpensive. small lightweight... something that looks like this:

Then you could keep your iPad Mini in purse, pack or pocket while making or receiving those infrequent, but pesky, phone calls.

Edit:  Oddly, the AppleTV remote is longer than the iPhone 4S and about the same length as the iPhone 5.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum 

 

They could limit a entry iPhone to China Mobile radio frequencies.

 

Possible New Products:

• iPad Mini Retina

• Hires Touch Screen (stylus) iMac or Large Tablet
• Airport with 802.11ac
• There should be a new Mac Pro -- possibly modular & Thunderbolt 2
• Home Server (ARM)
• Revised AppleTV -- crossload apps from Home Server, iPhone, iPad and Mac.

 

I still think that Apple will find a way to make the iPad Mini an inexpensive, convenient and acceptable iPhone substitute -- for emerging countries, and people that need a phone, but don't make a lot of phone calls.

 

Possibly this could be engineered so the iPad Mini communicated via Siri and BT with something that contains a few buttons, a speaker and a mic... something inexpensive. small lightweight... something that looks like this:

 

 

Then you could keep your iPad Mini in purse, pack or pocket while making or receiving those infrequent, but pesky, phone calls.

 

Edit:  Oddly, the AppleTV remote is longer than the iPhone 4S and about the same length as the iPhone 5.

 Or a bluetooth headset can turn a mini into a phone if it has the right phone circuitry.  While people can internet on the mini, and talk on the headset.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rsdofny 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum 

 

They could limit a entry iPhone to China Mobile radio frequencies.

 

Possible New Products:

• iPad Mini Retina

• Hires Touch Screen (stylus) iMac or Large Tablet
• Airport with 802.11ac
• There should be a new Mac Pro -- possibly modular & Thunderbolt 2
• Home Server (ARM)
• Revised AppleTV -- crossload apps from Home Server, iPhone, iPad and Mac.

 

I still think that Apple will find a way to make the iPad Mini an inexpensive, convenient and acceptable iPhone substitute -- for emerging countries, and people that need a phone, but don't make a lot of phone calls.

 

Possibly this could be engineered so the iPad Mini communicated via Siri and BT with something that contains a few buttons, a speaker and a mic... something inexpensive. small lightweight... something that looks like this:

 

 

Then you could keep your iPad Mini in purse, pack or pocket while making or receiving those infrequent, but pesky, phone calls.

 

Edit:  Oddly, the AppleTV remote is longer than the iPhone 4S and about the same length as the iPhone 5.

 Or a bluetooth headset can turn a mini into a phone if it has the right phone circuitry.  While people can internet on the mini, and talk on the headset.

Ohhhh Yeah!  It's not an either/or... Wear the headset when it's convenient -- like surf/navigate/text/FaceTime/compute/play/drive and talk -- and use the "remote" when you just want to answer or call.   You would have the same security and privacy with either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gazoobee 

Quote:

Originally Posted by anonymouse 

 

Yeah, BS all around on this one.

 

I could see it being real in the context of being a project to investigate the possibilities of such a device, but I sure hope they don't pull the trigger and actually start to sell it.  

Just put a damn phone in the iPad already is my advice, or actually put some f*cking work into "transforming the industry" and stopping the stranglehold the cell companies have over us all.  Apple gets major kudos for everyone for doing this but in fact they haven't actually done it at all (transform the industry).  They've caved in to the cell companies on almost every front. 

 

It's not only still the same old expensive shell game, it's worse, because the cell companies are all making massively more money, and their businesses are all twice as profitable on unit sales and on contract sales, yet the contract prices are the same as they were when only one person out of a hundred thousand customers needed a data contract.  This is obvious gouging at best.  

+++ QFT

Originally Posted by lghulm 
No Tallest Ski the 4/4S doesn't do all that I mentioned.

I specifically said that it needed to be new!

And yet your proposal isn't. So forgive me if your idea is nonsense.

There goes your credibility. Graphics cards show up in products sold to the general public. And when you keep selling the same thing but with a new name and new housing every year, calling it "new", people don't buy it. Both figuratively and literally.

Common sense. Which is why your idea is foolish; a new case with the same hardware doesn't move units.

Apologies. But this assumed new iPhone wouldn't be "mini".

Okay. 😕

And so, via this claim, nothing at all matters except a new case design. They'll buy anything as long as it looks different. That your argument? Because we've been over that argument.

So why didn't they give the iPhone 4S a brand new case? Why didn't they, as was rumored, take the iPhone 4 internals, put them in the 3GS case, and call it "cheap" or "new" or whatever, dropping the iPhone 4's original design? Why isn't the iPhone 5 a radical departure from the iPhones 4/S? 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum 

 

They could limit a entry iPhone to China Mobile radio frequencies.

 

Possible New Products:

• iPad Mini Retina

• Hires Touch Screen (stylus) iMac or Large Tablet
• Airport with 802.11ac
• There should be a new Mac Pro -- possibly modular & Thunderbolt 2
• Home Server (ARM)
• Revised AppleTV -- crossload apps from Home Server, iPhone, iPad and Mac.

 

I still think that Apple will find a way to make the iPad Mini an inexpensive, convenient and acceptable iPhone substitute -- for emerging countries, and people that need a phone, but don't make a lot of phone calls.

 

Possibly this could be engineered so the iPad Mini communicated via Siri and BT with something that contains a few buttons, a speaker and a mic... something inexpensive. small lightweight... something that looks like this:

 

 

Then you could keep your iPad Mini in purse, pack or pocket while making or receiving those infrequent, but pesky, phone calls.

 

Edit:  Oddly, the AppleTV remote is longer than the iPhone 4S and about the same length as the iPhone 5.

Yes, a combadge, that's what I said !

Quote:

Originally Posted by rsdofny 

 Or a bluetooth headset can turn a mini into a phone if it has the right phone circuitry.  While people can internet on the mini, and talk on the headset.

This won't work. I have an iPad 3 and a iPad mini, and also an iPhone. I have a bluetooth headset and could use my iPad for making calls with Skype for example if I so chose, but both it and the iPad Mini are simply too large to grab and carry with me when I go out to dinner, shopping, or anywhere else. I doubt I am alone in thinking they are just too large to use as your primary phone. 

That is not a viable solution in my opinion. I think the Samsung Note II has reached the maximum size in terms of what people want to tote with them outside their house. Adding telephony to the iPad line just doesn't pass the smell test at least not as a primary device. This is coming from a guy who would love for Apple to make a larger iPhone. I just think that something close to 4.8" would fill that niche far better than any iPad. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChuckD 

Eliminating the side bezel sounds like a stupid idea driven primarily by the 'need' to market the device as ultra-thin.

Narrow bezels only make sense for the iPad mini, which is narrow enough you can actually grasp its back with one hand.
 

I don't agree that thin[ner] bezels are a "stupid idea driven by the 'need' to market the device as ultra-thin".

Consider that a large percentage of iPads are in a case.  Apple has already implemented technology in the iPad Mini that recognizes and ignores casual touches on the margins of the display with narrow bezels.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rsdofny 

There are many ways to do that: 1) it can be a different brand name phone, say "pineapple".  The Tifanny people will pays a higher price for the personal statement whereas the walmart people can get the phone with similar functionalities; 2) network locked - China Mobile has a complete different network than the rest of world; 3) language locked - a chinese only phone.

I disagree. It really runs the risk of significant future fragmentation. Next you know, ATT in the US, Orange in the UK, Vodaphone in India, DoCoMo in Japan, etc etc will want their own 'pineapples.' It'll end up being an Android-like mess with iOS that caters to the lowest common denominator. Average costs will be higher (and quality will be lower) because you have too many suppliers to keep track of, not producing in high enough volumes to achieve the massive scale economies that contribute to Apple's margins. Finally, it completely dilutes Apple's brand.

Apple should stick to its core strategy, one that has made it the incredible company that it is. Stock price be damned in the short term (and I say that as an investor who is quite p-o'ed at where the stock price is today). 

Quote:

Originally Posted by lghulm 

When talking about a redesigned cheaper model I hate it when people say "they can just keep selling the iPhone 4 / 4S"

 

The thing is, as a marketer (which I am) it is so much better to be selling a redesigned 2013 iPhone Mini than it is a 2010/2011 iPhone 4/4S.

 

It can have the exact same chip, the exact same screen, the exact same OS, camera, the lot, but by virtue of being 'new' it will sell bucket loads more.

This is why new car models come out year after year with merely a change to the headlight shape or the front grill... the fact that it is different to the last years model, no matter that it is a minor change and simply cosmetic guarantees enhanced sales.

I understand this as a marketer and a consumer, I am not sure why so many people on this site miss it entirely.

 

An iPhone Mini (with plastic shell if you like) will outsell an iPhone 4/4S with identical specs simply because it is something new for the public to fall in love with.

 

The general public are not technology nerds (like us) and are looking for the latest product (not necessarily the best specs) at an affordable price, that looks attractive, works as advertised and fulfils the needs they have for purchasing the product: surfing the web, taking photos, making calls.

An iPhone Mini meets these criteria an iPhone 4/4S does not.

 

Of course Apple can further enhance the Mini's attractiveness by upping select specs above the 4/4S but it should be noted that this is not necessary for success but would help shift additional units if the price remained reasonable.

 

Someone please repost my thoughts in rebuttal the next time this argument evolves because I am tired of seeing it made and not refuted.

    ^

This

Quote:

Originally Posted by lghulm 

No Tallest Ski the 4/4S doesn't do all that I mentioned.

I specifically said that it needed to be new!

 

The GT item you are talking about.. I presume you are referring to a graphics card? Your example does not apply because it is referring to an item which is sold to nerds, I am particularly addressing items sold to the general public.

 

Even the most successful "add on" graphics card sells in the what, tens? hundreds of thousands? they are not at the level of a mass-market consumer mobile.

 

To restate it for you -> you will not get the sales from a 3 year old phone that you would from a brand new phone with the same specs at the same price.

 

BTW in my post when I referred to the "Mini" I was referring to the hypothetical new iPhone (like the rest of the post) not the iPad Mini, so your last point is redundant.

 

My final note - you refer to iPhone sales as the "tech industry" - it is not.

 

The tech industry is computer parts, do it yourself media servers, app programming, nerdy stuff.

 

The reason Apple is successful is that take items that had previously only existed as part of the tech industry and transformed them into consumer items, items that have lost all their techyness.

 

When sold to the average consumer the specs have melted away and the consumer is merely consuming the product for its function in their life: playing games, listening to music, staying in touch with friends -> as these functions exist outside of the tech industry so to do the products that enable their fulfilment.

 

Tech purchases do not meet this criteria ->those that play with "tech" do so to fulfill a range of other criteria often not solely derived from its function. 

An example would be buying computer parts to build a computer ->many do this out of personal pride and interest, or in a competitive or creative spirit which is quiet separate to an ordinary consumers desire to merely "game".

 

Whether I am right or wrong I tell you I am at least expressing to you Apples methodology and their own thinking - as an administrator on an Apple focussed site I would have thought that you would have a better grasp of Apple products.

Well said!  Hate to say it TS, but this guy is right on... if you think about it the only techy/nerdy device (for its time) that Apple has sold was the Apple I.  Everything since has tended towards the consumer/appliance mentality.

I work/play sitting in a chair in front of a computer --  that doesn't mean that I want to build, take apart or reprogram either one.

BTW, The above brochure is one I picked up at ComputerLand of San Jose in 1978 -- Bought my Apple ][ that July... And with 2 partners, opened the Sunnyvale Computer Plus store on Dec 28, 1978.

Quote:

Originally Posted by anantksundaram 

I disagree. It really runs the risk of significant future fragmentation. Next you know, ATT in the US, Orange in the UK, Vodaphone in India, DoCoMo in Japan, etc etc will want their own 'pineapples.' It'll end up being an Android-like mess with iOS that caters to the lowest common denominator. Average costs will be higher (and quality will be lower) because you have too many suppliers to keep track of, not producing in high enough volumes to achieve the massive scale economies that contribute to Apple's margins. Finally, it completely dilutes Apple's brand.

 

Apple should stick to its core strategy, one that has made it the incredible company that it is. Stock price be damned in the short term (and I say that as an investor who is quite p-o'ed at where the stock price is today). 

Apple will have little choice but to increase the number of iPhone models regardless once more countries start lighting up their version of LTE. If they can't make an LTE iPhone that works in countries with all these disparate bands then there would be little reason for people to buy an iPhone stuck at 3G when an Android phone offers 10 times faster data speeds. Currently there are only 3 distinct iPhone models. Apple doesn't support many of these bands or frequencies at all which include 2.5/2.6 GHz, 1800MHz, 800Mhz, 1800, 2100, 1500 and many more for LTE. Perhaps one day there will be a universal chip or at least one that can accomodate about 6 bands allowing them to still only make 2 or 3 separate and distinct iPhone models. The Sprint/Verizon model already comes close with 5. 

Even U.S. carriers will start using more bands in the future as they saturate current frequencies. Sprint will begin rolling out LTE on the old Clearwire 2.5GHz and the old Nextel ESMR band in the 861-866 MHz range in addition to the PCS 1900MHz they currently use. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_LTE_networks

http://www.apple.com/iphone/LTE/

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum 
Well said!  Hate to say it TS, but this guy is right on... if you think about it the only techy/nerdy device (for its time) that Apple has sold was the Apple I.  Everything since has tended towards the consumer/appliance mentality.

But do you think you could have sold a vanilla Apple ][, unchanged, in a new case, at half its original price, in 1985?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

 

But do you think you could have sold a vanilla Apple ][, unchanged, in a new case, at half its original price, in 1985?

No, but you sure could have  in 1979 and 1980. Who said anything about selling a 7 year old iPhone parts in a new case for half price? You love those straw men arguments don't you, exaggerate and completely change what the other person said and it is very easy to win any argument. He said to make a cheaper phone with parts from a recent iPhone as in 1 to maybe 3 years back NOT 7 year old technology like you love to use. 

I never understood why the upgraded iPad last fall was called the 4 instead of the 3S.

It was largely a speed bump, and calling it the 3S would have allowed the new form factor to be delivered earlier.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cinder6 


That's silly. For all that I don't really like it, Android definitely does some things better than iOS. I would really like to be able to toggle bluetooth, wifi, and airplane mode from the Notification Center, for instance. Also, Samsung's split window mode would be pretty great on an iPad. I would also like it if app updates showed up in Notification Center--and if you could download them from there, without having to switch to the App Store.

Quote:

Originally Posted by anonymouse 

 

These are all geeky things that are of zero importance to most consumers, particularly stuff like toggling, "bluetooth, wifi, and airplane mode from the Notification Center." Guess what, most people don't toggle these things at all. They might turn on AP mode, maybe, but, for them, the current method of doing that is fine. These sort of geek oriented changes copied from Android are not the sort of iOS changes that would be worthwhile to do, at all.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwmac 

 

Since when is turning bluetooth, wifi, or airplane on/off geeky? Anyone that uses a bluetooth headset might do that several times a day when you are trying to save every drop of battery life you can. I think the easiest solution is to fill up all the blank space on the Spotlight screen. When you swipe right it appears. Make the keyboard invisible until you try and type in the search bar and you have an entire blank screen where you could have quick access to bluetooth, wifi, or anything else. Personally I wish we could customize that space with whatever settings or shortcuts we like, but I doubt Apple ever wants us to have that level of customization. 

 

Swiping from bottom to top is also another way to add more options since it is currently the only swipe direction where nothing happens. 

 

I don't see any of what has been said as major OS overhauling features.

Most people on here are saying Apple needs to turn iOS completely upside down inside out and make it more like Android.

Honestly iOS is fine and there are only a few tweaks that would make it better. IMO Apple should strive to make the UI and functionality closer to OS X. I was playing with a Nexus 7 and I hated how they implemented settings on that device. Apple needs to do their own thing and not copy anyone else.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum 
Well said!  Hate to say it TS, but this guy is right on... if you think about it the only techy/nerdy device (for its time) that Apple has sold was the Apple I.  Everything since has tended towards the consumer/appliance mentality.

 

But do you think you could have sold a vanilla Apple ][, unchanged, in a new case, at half its original price, in 1985?

Yes!   Apple did [almost]* exactly that:

1976 Apple I

1977 Apple ][

1979 Apple ][ plus

1980 Apple III

1983 Apple IIe

1984 Apple Iic

1986 Apple IIGS

1988 Apple Iic Plus

 ... 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_II_series

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_III

* most of the above included incremental improvements:  cost, appearance, all-in-one, matching accessories, etc.  Certainly, there were power improvements, etc. -- but they were all just Apple ][s -- some with more features, others with less (no expansion slots).

The Cloud 9 Core universal remote was a handheld Apple Iic.  It was released between 1985-1988.  Woz owned Cloud 9, developed the Core -- and eventually sold the company.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CL_9

http://www.ktronicslc.com/core.html

The core was a true computer -- had the gust of an Apple Iic, a modem, RS-232 I/O -- and was programmable on a Mac as well as through the Core kb/display.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pedromartins 

No they can't. There's not a single rational people on this world that's going to pay full price for a 3 year old phone. No one. It has to be "new" and look "new", even if it is worse! That's how almost everyone thinks.

 

about the second sentence... It has to do with both. The note is as expensive or more, the galaxy s3 has almost the same base-price. If you can buy a 599 phone, you can buy a 699 and you will, if you think it's better.

 

There's a potential market of 50 million (or more) NEW COSTUMERS per quarter for big screens. (s3+note+ONE+Optimus+xperia+Nexus)

Plenty of people currently have NO PROBLEM buying the 3 year old iPhone 4. I would estimate Apple sold at least 10 million over the holiday quarter.

What benefits them is that the 4/4S don't look old. They still look fresh and have the iPhone look every knows. Because all the devices in the iPhone family already look similar its not going to have the problem a 3GS would have...

Quote:

Originally Posted by dasanman69 

A bumped up spec 3GS?

 

That would be completely unnecessary. If Apple designs an iPhone Mini, they should design it from scratch. If not, they can keep the iPhone 4 around and sell it for $299.

Originally Posted by gwmac 
You love those straw men arguments don't you…

Tech moves faster now. 7 years then isn't 7 years now. You know this. Don't pretend otherwise.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwmac 

I hope the 4.7" iPhone+ becomes a reality. If it doesn't make an appearance then the 5S or 6 along with iOS 7 needs to really have some major new draws to keep all the 4S owners in the fold as their upgrades mature.  Apple has never faced so much tough competition as they will in 2013 from Android. Not to mention a resurgent RIM that looks to have a pretty nice OS and a nostalgic but loyal base ready to stick with Blackberry or return if given a compelling reason. 

 

A cheaper but not "cheap" iPhone also makes sense. The cheapest current new iPhone is the 8GB iPhone 4  which is still $450 - $500 depending on the country without subsidies. It is a quality phone but is perceived rightly or wrongly as old. Over 70% of the world's smartphone customers do not get any subsidy at all for a phone so they have to pay the full price. Even the U.S. has changed to an extent and has hurt Apple sales quite dramatically. If the carriers all had the same upgrade policies they had 2 or 3 years ago in place, Apple would have breezed by 50 million iPhone sales. I used to get a full upgrade every 12 months but now it is 18 months, and for some carriers 20 or 22 months. Phone geeks still upgrade often and own 3 or 4 phones, but they are a tiny minority. 

 

Apple is good at making something cheaper in price without making it cheap. Even if that means taking essentially the guts out of the 4 or 4S and putting it into a plastic case to be able to offer a phone for $350. Many parents buy their kids those low end and dirt cheap Android phones that really are complete crap. But since kids lose and break phones it is a good choice since they are easy and cheap to replace. But once those kids get used to Android or any OS they tend to stay with what is familiar and comfortable and then buy a Galaxy or other expensive Android phone later. So a cheaper iPhone could serve as a gateway drug to lock them into the ecosystem. 

The iPhone 5/5S's screen is already bigger than the 4S. Shouldn't that be enough draw for them since their all coming from 3.5 inch screens?

I don't see why everyone here thinks a cheaper iPhone needs to be put in some nasty plastic case.

As I said the $50 iPod shuffle doesn't have a plastic case why would a $300 iPhone?

Quote:

Originally Posted by pedromartins 

no no no... are you guys blind? There's a brand new iPod touch with great margins for 329. put only 8gb, put a 3.5" retina (much cheaper), 800mhz a5 and you have an amazing new and great phone with 0 R&D, BOM of less than 160, machinery ready.

 

299, GREAT BUILD QUALITY, margins of more than 40%, much more marketshare so stronger ecosystem revenue. Same stuff they did with the mini.

 

I agree this what we should expect if and only if Apple made a cheaper iPhone.

Top grade materials, likely using iPod Touch internals. That would be a good phone.