or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › New pics show off supposed low-cost iPhone's plastic rear shell
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New pics show off supposed low-cost iPhone's plastic rear shell

post #1 of 92
Thread Starter 
Supposed images of a polycarbonate-backed, low-cost iPhone have hit the Internet, along with predictions that the cheaper Apple handset will see release in the fall of this year.

iphone


The image, released Thursday, started anew the rumors that Apple is planning to release an iPhone to compete for the lower-cost market. The casing shown looks to be a polycarbonate shell measuring between 0.4mm and 0.6mm thick, according to tech blog Tactus. It is less rounded than the iPhone 3GS, the last Apple phone to feature a plastic backing.

As Apple does not comment on speculation about future products, the image is near-impossible to verify. It does appear to bear some pixelization around the "iPhone" lettering and the Apple logo, as well as the holes for the camera and flash. These, though, could be the result of poor image quality as opposed to digital manipulation.

skepticism
Zooming in on the iPhone text shows some pixelization and apparent irregularities.


Inside, the budget iPhone is said to have an A5 processor like the iPad mini with a 32nm diecast. It would also supposedly pack a 3.5-inch Retina screen, smaller than the 4-inch screen on the iPhone 5. Tactus' account also has the device slated for an October 15 release, with a price of $300. This information in particular should be taken with a grain of salt, as it's unlikely that Apple would have a specific release date and price nailed down so far in advance, let alone that such information would leak to the supply chain.

The idea of a plastic-backed iPhone does jibe with recent rumors regarding Apple's plans to address the low-cost smartphone market. Apple, along with Samsung, captures the lion's share of profit in the smartphone sector, but Apple's iPhones are premium products with a corresponding price. A plastic iPhone, it is thought, would help Apple address the low end of the market and grow its share even further.

Observers disagree on what shape a low-cost iPhone might take. Consensus seems to have settled around a polycarbonate chassis, but some reports have Apple putting a non-Retina display in the device, while others have the company keeping the same display that's seen in the iPhone 5.
post #2 of 92
Hope not. Looks like a third-rate product.
post #3 of 92
looks pretty fake to me!
post #4 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Hope not. Looks like a third-rate product.

 

What do you expect? This is what you get when you try to make something cheap....which is why I don't think Apple needs to make a cheap phone. If you can't afford it then oh well. You can't always get everything you want. Apple has always said they aren't going to be in a race to the bottom and this is exactly what a cheap phone does. They're starting to compete on price, which is exactly what you don't want to do. 

 

This is what happens when you start to listen to shareholders, customers, analysts, etc and lose focus on just creating great products. 


Edited by macxpress - 4/18/13 at 7:17am

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5
120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5
120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply
post #5 of 92
The fakest fake I've ever faking seen.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #6 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post

What do you expect? This is what you get when you try to make something cheap....which is why I don't think Apple needs to make a cheap phone. If you can't afford it then oh well. You can't always get everything you want. Apple has always said they aren't going to be in a race to the bottom and this is exactly what a cheap phone does. They're starting to compete on price, which is exactly what you don't want to do. 

Not sure where this logic comes from. Just because it's cheaper in price doesn't mean it's not an Apple worthy product. They did this with their iPods, offering all different sizes and capacities to reach as broad of an audience as they could. They also did this with the MacBook, remember the polycarbonate version of that? Just because it isn't as nice as say the iPhone 5 in that it doesn't use metal as it's chassis, doesn't mean it can't still be a quality product at a lower price point.
post #7 of 92
I prefer the materials and the look of the iPhone 5, but I still like this polycarbonate shell. Sure it will look better with the marketing lust from Apple.

High-end phones with premium material and low-end phones with cheaper materials.
It will sell if it's cheaper than what Apple's current price structure offers with its last generation phones.
post #8 of 92
Originally Posted by widmark View Post
looks pretty fake to me!

 

Looks pretty REAL to me.

 

This is absolutely horrible if true. I don't want Tim Cook and Co. LISTENING TO ANYONE but themselves. I don't want these idiot whiners to dictate company policy. We'll never have any future products that way. The iPhone would have had a keyboard and the iPad would have run OS X. And the mouse never would have gone into a consumer product.

Ugh, look at that thing. The case curves up around to the front; there's a lip there… 😨

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #9 of 92
1) It looks like someone took the white MacBook design and applied it to the iPhone. I can't see a budget iPhone doing that. I'd expect it to at least copy the back of he 2nd and 3rd gen iPhone's plastic back so that it tapers to the edge.

2) At 3.5" that seems like an issue since Apple is no longer accepting such apps that are only designed for the 3.5" UI, and I don't thin require you to build for the 3.5" UI. That doesn't sound like a good plan if they are to introduce 3.5" back into the market.

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #10 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Looks pretty REAL to me.

 

This is absolutely horrible if true. I don't want Tim Cook and Co. LISTENING TO ANYONE but themselves. I don't want these idiot whiners to dictate company policy. We'll never have any future products that way. The iPhone would have had a keyboard and the iPad would have run OS X. And the mouse never would have gone into a consumer product.

Ugh, look at that thing. The case curves up around to the front; there's a lip there… 😨

 

Still, it will happen. I like this shell. You're not forced to buy it. And Apple will keep on making the high-end iPhone.

post #11 of 92
I still find it hard to see a use case, or a market that these phones could be sold in without completely destroying the sales of the "main" iPhone. The plastic casing wouldn't shave that much off the cost, it would have to use last year's components for starters and that would still only make it marginally cheaper than buying last year's iPhone instead.

The cost would have to be below $200 off-contract, and they would have to stop selling last year's models as they currently do (there would be a recycling cost there as well). Then the offer could be more like "This year's iPhone is $200 on contract, and the cheap one is last year's iPhone (in a cheap shell) for $200 *off* contract."

Even so, I'm not sure buying last year's iPhone guts, housed in a plastic shell is really going to sell well, but then I have never understood why anyone would buy last year's anything.
post #12 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

1) It looks like someone took the white MacBook design and applied it to the iPhone. I can't see a budget iPhone doing that. I'd expect it to at least copy the back of he 2nd and 3rd gen iPhone's plastic back so that it tapers to the edge.

2) At 3.5" that seems like an issue since Apple is no longer accepting such apps that are only designed for the 3.5" UI, and I don't thin require you to build for the 3.5" UI. That doesn't sound like a good plan if they are to introduce 3.5" back into the market.

 

2) Chances are pretty good it will have a 4 inch screen.

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/03/15/apples-budget-iphone-expected-to-have-same-4-inch-display-as-iphone-5

post #13 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Hope not. Looks like a third-rate product.

You mean like a (badly) photoshopped Nokia Lumia?



Camera hole is too high, iPhone text has no perspective on it and the grey strip isn't part of the watermark.

If they did make one, it would look like the 3G(S):

post #14 of 92
Originally Posted by yvvv View Post
Still, it will happen.

 

Well, no, that's not at all true.


Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post
skepticism

Zooming in on the iPhone text shows some pixelization and apparent irregularities.
 

 

Yeah, it's called a JPG. That's why I don't use them, myself. I hate JPGs. lol.gif

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #15 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I don't want Tim Cook and Co. LISTENING TO ANYONE but themselves.
Why do you assume that they are? Steve Jobs could have had this idea while working on the original iPhone. The 3G could have been the first attempt. It's a perfectly rational plan by any manufacturer, especially when considering markets like India and China.
post #16 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

The fakest fake I've ever faking seen.

Yeah, I'm not getting the changes in the mute switch and volume rocker switch.

I wouldn't mind seeing a 3GS looking iphone with better guts and display. Not just bargain priced for consumer, I can see corporate liking a lower cost, less fragile design.
post #17 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Well, no, that's not at all true.

 

Ok, that's your opinion and I have mine.

 

Right now, IMO, the chances are leaning heavily towards a budget iPhone becoming a reality at the end of 2013.

post #18 of 92
Originally Posted by yvvv View Post
Ok, that's your opinion and I have mine.

 

Right!


Right now, IMO, the chances are leaning heavily towards a budget iPhone becoming a reality at the end of 2013.

 

Even if we pretend this IS true, the argument then becomes over the means by which this is accomplished. Whether it be wasting resources on a horrible phone like this or just dropping the 4S to $300 off-contract.

 

Heck, what is it now, $450? $350 off-contract would be enough.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #19 of 92

I think, it is going to do really good business.  Even in America it will sell out like anything.

post #20 of 92
Blech. Hope it's a prototype that never leaves the design or manufacturing site.
post #21 of 92
We are Samsung. Resistance Is Futile. You Will Be Copied.
post #22 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I don't want Tim Cook and Co. LISTENING TO ANYONE but themselves.

 

I see no indication they are listening to anyone but themselves, for better or worse. It would be nice if they communicated with someone besides themselves, if only in maintenance of their brand and mindshare. At this time it looks like a year of silence to wait for a plastic down scale iPhone and a minor iPad update. I hope there is more.

post #23 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

1) It looks like someone took the white MacBook design and applied it to the iPhone.
Funny, when I first saw it I thought it looked just like e iPad mini. How's that for unifying the product line?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

2) At 3.5" that seems like an issue since Apple is no longer accepting such apps that are only designed for the 3.5" UI, and I don't thin require you to build for the 3.5" UI. That doesn't sound like a good plan if they are to introduce 3.5" back into the market.
Well first, why would anyone design an app only for the 3.5 UI and cut themselves out of the iPhone 5 market? That's just common sense.

Second, of course they don't require you to build for the 3.5 UI. Despite the fact the 4 & 4S are still being sold, and if there's no low one-size-fits-all low budget entry level iPhone, the 4S will continue to sold, (and likely will anyway), a developer leaving out the 3.5UI does so again at their own peril.

Third, what "introduce 3.5" back into the market"? It never left. New apps everyday are being released that are compatible with 3.5. Are there even any that currently only run on the iPhone 5?

I really don't see the problem here. In fact I'm in favor of it, as I prefer my mobile phones get smaller, not larger.
post #24 of 92
"They did this with their iPods, offering all different sizes and capacities to reach as broad of an audience as they could. "

the ipod mini and then nano were NEVER a cheap product

they were great product in their own market, you could say they were the most expensive in their own price bracket of the market.

The point is, nano was well designed, good material, rich-feature, sold as a GREAT tiny ipod.

and if you wanted what only a bigger design allowed (big screen, huge storage and so on) then: iPod.

-
a "cheaper" iphone is bad for Apple. But a significant different iphone with an other INTERESTING value proposition could be nice. But it still has to be a GREAT device. Even if it is still expensive for its value.

One you would ask yourself "hmm.. I want what the iphone can do, but still.. that new device is great.. ho my !"
post #25 of 92

It looks awful, But strangely enough it still stands positively out against any of Sammy's Smartphones.

 

So maybe it's worth they try it.

post #26 of 92
Looks like a flattened 3G/3GS to me. This may or may not be fake, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if this is the new low end iPhone this summer.

BTW -- the people saying it looks fake sound a lot like the same people who said the 3G, 4 and 5 leaked pictures looked fake too. I think it's pretty clear that there are a lot of people who have a bad track record at recognizing real leaked photos vs faked ones here.
post #27 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post

 

What do you expect? This is what you get when you try to make something cheap....which is why I don't think Apple needs to make a cheap phone. If you can't afford it then oh well. You can't always get everything you want. Apple has always said they aren't going to be in a race to the bottom and this is exactly what a cheap phone does. They're starting to compete on price, which is exactly what you don't want to do. 

 

This is what happens when you start to listen to shareholders, customers, analysts, etc and lose focus on just creating great products. 

Is this where we get the same old tired old arguments we got last year prior to the iPad mini? 

 

It is, isn't it?

I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #28 of 92
Originally Posted by JollyPaul View Post
I see no indication they are listening to anyone but themselves…

 

I do.

 

I sat five minutes after typing that trying to remember instances to list, because there have been more than one. I think I'm… going to leave for now.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #29 of 92

That's ugly... but it reminds me of the old plastic macbooks.

post #30 of 92

Apple is unlikely to go ahead with one model iPhone for ever and ever - they don't do that any where else.

 

As for the iPhone 4S, a fine machine, but it comes with one years OS support if it becomes the low end model.

 

This phone has to work well, but it also needs to look a bit cheaper than the top end model. The problem with the iPad mini is it looked better than the iPad ( and felt better too, which is why Apple are scrambling to make the bigger iPad lighter, as well as make it look like the mini in styling).

 

Apple will, no doubt, have features on the high end ( fingerprint, NFC?) which will appeal to some, but they need to make people who can afford the high end model have a compelling reason to buy it ( and design counts) unlike the iPad vs iPad mini. Retina wasn't a differential enough.

 

So this will be cheap. And cheaper looking. As long as it runs the latest OS really well, it won't matter in the markets they are targeting.

 

Also, the blue version might look better :-P

I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #31 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_128 View Post

Third, what "introduce 3.5" back into the market"?

What NEW iPhone has had a 3.5" display since the iPhone 5? Zero. Zilch. Zip. What you're stating is that because they are currently still selling older handsets (like they have done since the iPhone 3GS release when they continued to sell the iPhone 3G) that they will continue to move into new more models with a 3.5" display. While that is technically possible (yet I think it's in improbable given Apple's history) it's silly to assume that the iPhone 4 on the market means that new models will be brought back into the market to prop up the 3.5" device. Apple has a long history of controlled, systematic obsolescence that makes it easy on the developer and consumer. Sticking with 3.5 for a brand new device limit the ease in which they can add another size display.

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #32 of 92
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post
As for the iPhone 4S, a fine machine, but it comes with one years OS support if it becomes the low end model.

 

Just like every other low-end iPhone. What's the big deal?

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #33 of 92

If Apple really plans to make a cheap iPhone model, I can see them only releasing it in countries like India, Brazil, SE Asian countries, etc. I don't think they would release a cheap phone in North America or other western countries. If true, hopefully that's not what the low cost iPhone looks like. That looks extremely plain and boring. 

post #34 of 92
If this is true I'll be curious to see how Apple announces this and markets it. Especially if the primary audience is consumers in India and China. Would Apple make a low cost phone that's only sold in certain markets?

There might be very solid business reasons for Apple to start selling a cheaper off contract phone. But I have to admit there's nothing exciting about it and I can't see people getting excited about basically an iPhone 3GS that maybe comes in colors. Also begs the question if this is it, why did it take Apple so long to do it? Why wasn't there a "cheaper" iPhone off contract 2 years ago?
post #35 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

Is this where we get the same old tired old arguments we got last year prior to the iPad mini? 

 

It is, isn't it?

 

No, not at all. The iPad Mini is in no way cheap. It doesn't look cheap, feel cheap, operate cheap, and its really not that cheap if you want to compete on price. 

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5
120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5
120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply
post #36 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by oomu View Post

"They did this with their iPods, offering all different sizes and capacities to reach as broad of an audience as they could. "

the ipod mini and then nano were NEVER a cheap product

they were great product in their own market, you could say they were the most expensive in their own price bracket of the market.

The point is, nano was well designed, good material, rich-feature, sold as a GREAT tiny ipod.

and if you wanted what only a bigger design allowed (big screen, huge storage and so on) then: iPod.

-
a "cheaper" iphone is bad for Apple. But a significant different iphone with an other INTERESTING value proposition could be nice. But it still has to be a GREAT device. Even if it is still expensive for its value.

One you would ask yourself "hmm.. I want what the iphone can do, but still.. that new device is great.. ho my !"
 

Exactly.  

 

A cheaper version of the already existing iPhone is not something they would do.  People forget that the iPods are all different sizes but they all do different things, and fit different use-cases while at the same time maintaining the basic killer function, in this case ... portable music.  

 

The "killer" or central function of an iPhone (or any smartphone) is not actually making calls.  A cheaper iPhone without the ability to play apps for instance (in the same way that the cheaper iPods can't access the store) would be a failure.  A cheaper iPhone that didn't do WiFi would be a similar failure.  There simply aren't any features or things that you could remove from an iPhone and have it still remain an iPhone in the same way that an iPod nano is still an iPod.  

 

IMO there are only three scenarios that make any kind of sense: 

 

1) It's something completely different and new that makes it's own use case.

2) It replaces the selling of "last year's iPhone" by putting last year's iPhone guts in a cheap plastic case, and somehow this saves enough money that it can basically be given away at the same price as the "year before last year's" iPhone.  

3) It isn't happening at all.  

 

The 3.5" screen on this leak would seem to argue very strongly for number 3.

post #37 of 92
The holes on the side look wrong, it looks as if the silence toggle has moved to underneath the volume buttons. It's going to be fake anyway, although I am not as opposed to a cheaper iPhone as some seem to be. As others have pointed out, Apple has done this before and most recently with the iPad mini. Nothing wrong with cannablising some high end iPhone sales if the alternative is losing masses of market share to Samsung.
post #38 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post

No, not at all. The iPad Mini is in no way cheap. It doesn't look cheap, feel cheap, operate cheap, and its really not that cheap if you want to compete on price. 

What's funny is that the Galaxy Note 8.0 starts at $70 more than the iPad mini at $399 yet the reviews say it looks and feels considerably less quality than the iPad mini. It's display size is 0.1" more than the iPad mini but it's a smaller display in area and unless you're really only using it to watch videos it's not as ideal as the iPad mini's display. It also weighs more and is bigger in every dimension than the iPad mini which went on sale in 2012.

It does have at least one feature I wish Apple would adopt; namely, the Wacom digitizer, which also accounts for some additional costs across the board, but I doubt that even comes close to balancing out the weight, size, and cost issues compared to the iPad mini.

Finally, the display has a slightly higher PPI but not enough to account for the price and it's still well enough being Retina-quality. If it came with 1920x1080 it would be Retina-quality and make that price point more justifiable. I suspect the next model will resolve a lot of these issues if Samsung is truly serious about selling a better quality device.

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #39 of 92

This is disappointing, if true.

 

The Apple that I know and love is now making third rate phones for third world people. Maybe all of those people whining about cheap phones finally got to them.

 

I used to look forward to the keynotes and new product announcements, but what is there to look forward to now, if this is the kind of products they'll be making?

post #40 of 92

In another beathless "announcement" showing that image they casually mentioned the originator had never been heard of before now.

 

Yeah that's a reliable source...

 

Not.

 

I expect rrality will show up alongside the China Mobile announcement, which will most likely coincide with the China Mobile compatible iPhone "5s" announcement.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › New pics show off supposed low-cost iPhone's plastic rear shell