or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Case intended for Apple's low-cost iPhone shows thicker, rounded design
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Case intended for Apple's low-cost iPhone shows thicker, rounded design - Page 2

post #41 of 43

The Mac mini isn't a cheaper iMac, it's a headless Mac. The iPod Shuffle isn't a cheaper iPod, it's an iPod without a screen so small it can be clipped on to your shirt collar. The iPad mini isn't a cheaper iPad, it's one so small and thin that you can more easily take it anywhere and hold it for hours while reading (plus it's a great size for games!). If you still don't get it, here's another example: the iMac isn't a cheaper Mac Pro, just as the Mac Pro isn't a more expensive iMac. These products differ in features and functionality first, that's how Apple does product differentiation and they are very, very good at it.

 

My point - this phone will not be a cheaper iPhone, that's not what Apple does. Some companies differentiate on price, but Apple does not. They will make this phone so different that it's feature set will be either a subset or a complement to the feature set and functionality of the current iPhone. Do not think of this as a cheaper iPhone, Apple didn't put "make a cheaper iPhone" as its objective, because if they did that their team would design something like a Galaxy.<wry grin>

 

When Apple expands any product family they don't put cost at the top of the list of objectives for any new model in the product family. Targeting cost as an objective mainly means: 1) shrinking profit margins and 2) reducing quality - there are myriad manufacturers out there who already do this and do it very well, much better than Apple could ever hope to achieve.

 

If this phone exists, it will not be a cheaper iPhone, it'll be an iPhone with a very different feature set. It has nothing to do with contracts, it has nothing to do with cheaper materials, it has nothing to do with old technology. It will be all about features and functionality. And, yes, all this will just happen to carry a lower price tag.


Edited by williamlondon - 6/18/13 at 4:55pm
post #42 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by williamlondon View Post

The Mac mini isn't a cheaper iMac, it's a headless Mac. The iPod Shuffle isn't a cheaper iPod, it's an iPod without a screen so small it can be clipped on to your shirt collar. The iPad mini isn't a cheaper iPad, it's one so small and thin that you can more easily take it anywhere and hold it for hours while reading (plus it's a great size for games!). If you still don't get it, here's another example: the iMac isn't a cheaper Mac Pro, just as the Mac Pro isn't a more expensive iMac. These products differ in features and functionality first, that's how Apple does product differentiation and they are very, very good at it.

 

My point - this phone will not be a cheaper iPhone, that's not what Apple does. Some companies differentiate on price, but Apple does not. They will make this phone so different that it's feature set will be either a subset or a complement to the feature set and functionality of the current iPhone. Do not think of this as a cheaper iPhone, Apple didn't put "make a cheaper iPhone" as its objective, because if they did that their team would design something like a Galaxy.<wry grin>

 

When Apple expands any product family they don't put cost at the top of the list of objectives for any new model in the product family. Targeting cost as an objective mainly means: 1) shrinking profit margins and 2) reducing quality - there are myriad manufacturers out there who already do this and do it very well, much better than Apple could ever hope to achieve.

 

If this phone exists, it will not be a cheaper iPhone, it'll be an iPhone with a very different feature set. It has nothing to do with contracts, it has nothing to do with cheaper materials, it has nothing to do with old technology. It will be all about features and functionality. And, yes, all this will just happen to carry a lower price tag.

 

Easy there.  We're saying the EXACT same thing.  You need to read the rest of my reply. 1wink.gif

 

You are completely right that Apple does not compete on price, and I never suggested that they do.  You read that into it what I was saying.  Apple always has a target when it releases a lower cost device.

 

If you read the rest of what I said, and what I have said several times on this thread, I said it is a cheaper iPhone but it is also a premium phone.  Overall, it is cheaper, but in the market it is targeting, it will be the premium device.  The iPod Nano was a premium MP3 player compared to the flash based players at the time.  Apple always kept the iPod Nano at the front of the pack in features.  While the Mac Mini isn't near as cheap as a Dell desktop, there's no comparison in what you get from the two.

 

You actually restated what I said in an attempt to correct me.  Apple produces products that are cheaper than some of its other devices, but that doesn't make them less than premium.  They are just targeting a market segment where the price needs to be lower to compete at all.

post #43 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by rednival View Post

 

Easy there.  We're saying the EXACT same thing.  You need to read the rest of my reply. 1wink.gif

 

You are completely right that Apple does not compete on price, and I never suggested that they do.  You read that into it what I was saying.  Apple always has a target when it releases a lower cost device.

 

If you read the rest of what I said, and what I have said several times on this thread, I said it is a cheaper iPhone but it is also a premium phone.  Overall, it is cheaper, but in the market it is targeting, it will be the premium device.  The iPod Nano was a premium MP3 player compared to the flash based players at the time.  Apple always kept the iPod Nano at the front of the pack in features.  While the Mac Mini isn't near as cheap as a Dell desktop, there's no comparison in what you get from the two.

 

You actually restated what I said in an attempt to correct me.  Apple produces products that are cheaper than some of its other devices, but that doesn't make them less than premium.  They are just targeting a market segment where the price needs to be lower to compete at all.

 

Wait a minute, easy there. Er, scratch that, I hate that phrase, "easy there," I take it back.<wry grin>

 

Of course I read your post (all of it, more than once even!<smile>), and the reason I didn't quote any of it, is because it wasn't you in particular to whom I was replying. This wasn't a personal message to you - I would have quoted you if I'd meant to speak directly to you.

 

I've been following this story of a "cheaper iPhone" since it first hit the rumour mill and there seems to be (in the blogosphere) a lack of understanding of what is product differentiation, product positioning and product strategy as it relates to the world of Apple.

 

Your post went more than most in demonstrating an understanding, but if I can be honest, the one thing I still saw in your post was that you did attach the term "cheaper" to every product you mentioned, perhaps it was merely for illustration purposes to point out Apple produces products that sell at cheaper price points, but viewing Apple products on a scale of prices I think doesn't appropriately convey the world of Apple. Every time I have this discussion, people invariably say, "yes, but there is a cheaper iPod than the Touch, right?" still missing the point.

 

Let me explain another way (not necessarily to you, please don't take this as a personal message<grin>):

 

Let's assume there are two teams appointed to design and produce a new addition to the iPad family. One team gets the objective: create a cheaper iPad. The other team gets the objective: create a smaller iPad. Imagine the output from each team. Which objective do you think the team that actually produced the mini got? People quite often call the mini the cheaper iPad (cheaper being the only descriptive term they use), so why is that? I don't see the mini as the cheaper iPad, I see it as the smaller iPad. Apple and the iPad mini team made decisions in design and development having to do with size, not cost, so why do people still see this product in terms of price?

 

If Apple produces a new model for the iPhone family, assuming it's different than what they did with the iPod Touch recently, then this new iPhone will be something as different from the current iPhone as the Mac Pro is different from the iMac. I'm merely trying to get people to take away the cost and price blinders when looking at Apple products. A good test to put to someone would be: how would you describe these products if cost/price weren't terms you could use to describe them?

 

Sorry if it appears you were the main target of my post, although I admittedly highjacked some elements of your post to make my point, I didn't intend you to the be the target of my rant diatribe words delivered from upon my soapbox. :) Hope that explains, and sorry for the long post (once again).


Edited by williamlondon - 6/19/13 at 1:42pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Case intended for Apple's low-cost iPhone shows thicker, rounded design