or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › New 3D renderings show expected design of Apple's low-cost iPhone
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New 3D renderings show expected design of Apple's low-cost iPhone - Page 3

post #81 of 106
8 GB of flash, tops. Otherwise it cannibalizes the 5S.
post #82 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

Will be interesting to see how Apple markets the lower-cost iPhone (if it really exists.)  How will they prevent it from cannibalizing the high-end iPhone?  How will they be able to stop gray market imports to the US from China or wherever it's going to be sold?

If Apple builds a lower-cost iPhone specifically for China Mobile, and if it only supports their oddball TD-SCDMA protocol, then that iPhone won't work anywhere else in the world.  Right now, China Mobile is the only carrier that uses TD-SCDMA (because it allows them to avoid paying patent licensing fees.)  Eventually, China Mobile will roll out their proprietary TD-LTE technology, so maybe the lower-cost iPhone could work with both TD-x protocols.  Might be worth it, and there would be zero gray market for it (outside of China.)

Also, it's possible that the TD-SCDMA and TD-LTE technology could spread to other emerging markets.  Again, because it doesn't require patent licensing fees.  So the market for TD-x-only iPhones could increase over time, all without threatening the high-end iPhone in industrialized markets.  Just a thought.

A Few Corrections.

TD-LTE is not proprietary. But TD-SCDMA is. TD-LTE is currently / will be deployed in Brazil, Japan ( SoftBank ), India, Russia, some Part of Europe or even US ( ClearWire ) and other areas where there were WiMax previously.

It wouldn't make sense for Apple to release an iPhone specially for China Market. That is just not Apple do. However it would make sense for Apple to release an iPhone with only 3G/3.75G connection, a World Wide 3G including CDMA2000. The current 4G related component are hugely expensive. The difference between top of the line 4G and 3G only solution could amount up to $15 BOM difference.

The majority of the world still have their 2100Mhz Channel running 3G HSPA+, so it make sense to have an iPhone to continue using those resources. Especially when VoLTE start rolling out at the end of this year and finally moving to a full 4G solution without ever dropping to 3G for voice connection.

There are only two kind of people in this world.

Those who dont understand Apple and those who misunderstood Apple.

Reply

There are only two kind of people in this world.

Those who dont understand Apple and those who misunderstood Apple.

Reply
post #83 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

The old iPhone and the iPhone 4 were superb designs in your hand. The iPhone 5 is a step back from the 4 in form and feel, for my tastes.
For me it's the opposite. The 5 feels so much lighter and I like that the back is flat. The ridge between the glass and stainless steel band never felt comfortable in my hand.
post #84 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post

The descriptor you were searching for is "understated," like a pearl white Lamborgheni. 
If its like the silver iPod touch maybe. If its the 3GS redux no.
post #85 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Maybe but no one yet has provided a good explanation for why it has to be plastic. Based on the off contract prices people here are throwing around it doesn't seem like keeping the price down is the reason. There isn't one flagship Apple device right now that is plastic. Couldn't they take the current iPod touch design and make a phone out of it? Currently 32GB is $299. Could they throw in cellular components (and maybe reduce the storage to 16GB) and sell it for $399 off contract? Or maybe $450 which is the current price of the iPhone 4?

It's not about cost. It's about marketing.

If (and that is still a big 'if') Apple releases a lower cost (not low cost) iPhone, it will be clearly distinguishable from the premium iPhone 5/5S. Think of it as Toyota vs Lexus. If you consider the iPhone 5 to be a Lexus, the iPhone Lite would be a Toyota - not a Yugo.

When you do that, you want something that's clearly distinguishable and which says "premium" on the high end and "mass market" on the lower end.

Compare the Toyota Camry to the Lexus ES3x0 series. There are a lot of similarities, but they're clearly different. If you listed to the complainers on this forum, you'd say "they'll never sell the Lexus because the Camry is so similar and it's so much less expensive". That's clearly nonsense.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #86 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Hmm...all the people who make fun of Samsung and others for using plastic? I thought one of the reasons Apple was able to charge a premium was because of the materials they use like aluminum and glass and stainless steel. For sure that was one of the selling features of the iPad mini, one of the reasosn they could charge $329 for it when other tablets with better displays are selling for less.

You thought wrong.
post #87 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraboy View Post

8 GB of flash, tops. Otherwise it cannibalizes the 5S.

No, not at all.
post #88 of 106
What are the chances of this release?
post #89 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Maybe but no one yet has provided a good explanation for why it has to be plastic...
...There isn't one flagship Apple device right now that is plastic. Couldn't they take the current iPod touch design and make a phone out of it?..
...Could they throw in cellular components...

As well as the reasons Flaneur mentioned above, there's another design aspect: cellular radios.

It is truly a feat of engineering that the radio-transparent glass/ceramic panels on the iPhone 5 are as small as they are. Cellular radios use a ton of energy and are very fickle when it comes to reception. Remember the first iPhone? iPod touch has a wifi and Bluetooth radio only. Their transmission distances are lower etc. If Apple could do a great curved back metal iphone to their high standards, without resorting to jiggering the whole thing into an antennae, we'd have it. And you can bet that when we do, it'll be the flagship.

Having said that, the mass-market mini versions often have ostensibly nicer materials and/or finishes, with colour. So it's not entirely clear, but still doubtful on the whole metal back tbh
post #90 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

To imagine pricing for a new iPhone you have to look at current pricing. The base 16GB model is $649. I doubt that will change. It will get better specs and probably the base model will move to 32GB but I am confident that $649 price will stick.

That means the most likely price for a cheaper iPhone which would replace the 4/4S/5 models would very likely be a base model with a $449 price. 

Flagship iPhone 
32GB $199 on contract $649 unsubsidized 
64GB $299 on contract $749 unsubsidized 
128GB $399 on contract $849 unsubsidized 

Cheaper iPhone
16GB free on contract $449 unsubsidized 
32GB $99 on contract $549 unsubsidized 

I like the bump to 32GB for the base model flagship iPhone 1smile.gif

But on the low end... it's not any cheaper than what is currently available.

The $449 price is the reason the iPhone is having trouble expanding to new markets right now.

Storage isn't the issue with the entry-level iPhone... price is.

If anything... I'd envision a $349 8GB model to be the entry-level point. That would truly be a "cheaper" iPhone.
post #91 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post


I like the bump to 32GB for the base model flagship iPhone 1smile.gif

But on the low end... it's not any cheaper than what is currently available.

The $449 price is the reason the iPhone is having trouble expanding to new markets right now.

Storage isn't the issue with the entry-level iPhone... price is.

If anything... I'd envision a $349 8GB model to be the entry-level point. That would truly be a "cheaper" iPhone.

Well the reason for my chart is because the 16GB iPhone 4S is now being sold new off contract for $549. A $100 drop to $449 though not cheap is pretty significant. I just don't think Apple will try and compete in the sub $400 market. I also don't think they want to make any new phones with only 8GB as this would not give a very good experience for the end user since storage would quickly fill up. $449 would still be a cheaper iPhone at $100 cheaper than the current 4S but still allow Apple a safe margin. Apple doesn't need to compete in the low tier phones but in the mid tier which this would accomplish. ANd remember this phone would likely be free on contract.

 

When you include contract and off contract prices this would give Apple an option from free all the way to $849 at every $100 price point in between.

post #92 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

Well the reason for my chart is because the 16GB iPhone 4S is now being sold new off contract for $549. A $100 drop to $449 though not cheap is pretty significant. I just don't think Apple will try and compete in the sub $400 market. I also don't think they want to make any new phones with only 8GB as this would not give a very good experience for the end user since storage would quickly fill up. $449 would still be a cheaper iPhone at $100 cheaper than the current 4S but still allow Apple a safe margin. Apple doesn't need to compete in the low tier phones but in the mid tier which this would accomplish. ANd remember this phone would likely be free on contract.

When you include contract and off contract prices this would give Apple an option from free all the way to $849 at every $100 price point in between.

I'm still confused by you calling a $449 iPhone "cheaper" when that's the price the iPhone starts at already.

I understand the storage part... and it's actually a better value if you can get 16GB at the old 8GB price.

But "cheaper" or "low-cost" as mentioned in this article refers to price.

How can Apple be making a "low-cost" iPhone with a price that's exactly the same as today? That doesn't make any sense.

In other words... if it's not below $449... it's not cheaper.

I realize this is all rumor at this point. But when I hear "cheaper iPhone" I expect it to actually be cheaper than what's currently available.
post #93 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post


I'm still confused by you calling a $449 iPhone "cheaper" when that's the price the iPhone starts at already.

I understand the storage part... and it's actually a better value if you can get 16GB at the old 8GB price.

But "cheaper" or "low-cost" as mentioned in this article refers to price.

How can Apple be making a "low-cost" iPhone with a price that's exactly the same as today? That doesn't make any sense.

In other words... if it's not below $449... it's not cheaper.

I realize this is all rumor at this point. But when I hear "cheaper iPhone" I expect it to actually be cheaper than what's currently available.

 

Where are you getting $449 from today? The iPhone 4S which is nearly 2 years old now is selling for $549 if you buy it without a subsidy.  So a new $449 iPhone would be $100 cheaper than the 4S is selling for today

post #94 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

Where are you getting $449 from today? The iPhone 4S which is nearly 2 years old now is selling for $549 if you buy it without a subsidy.  So a new $449 iPhone would be $100 cheaper than the 4S is selling for today

You seems to be forgetting about the iPhone 4 which is still on sale at this very moment.

Here are today's prices:

$449 - iPhone 4
$549 - iPhone 4S
$649 - iPhone 5

And it's been like that for years: the newest iPhone at $649... the previous model at $549... and the model before that at $449.

In other words... the iPhone has had a starting price of $449 for quite some time. That's where I'm getting that price from.

So no... an iPhone at $449 would not be cheaper at all.

post #95 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post


You seems to be forgetting about the iPhone 4 which is still on sale at this very moment.

Here are today's prices:

$449 - iPhone 4
$549 - iPhone 4S
$649 - iPhone 5

And it's been like that for years: the newest iPhone at $649... the previous model at $549... and the model before that at $449.

In other words... the iPhone has had a starting price of $449 for quite some time. That's where I'm getting that price from.

So no... an iPhone at $449 would not be cheaper at all.

Nope not forgetting it at all. That phone is nearly 3 years old now. I am talking about selling a brand new current year iPhone for $449 which is a very big difference vs. selling one 3 years old. Doesn't the 4 also only include 8GB? The one I expect Apple to release would have 16GB as well as LTE.  My product matrix makes sense because in one fell swoop Apple can ditch 3.5" forever as well as 30 pin and move to 4" and lightning for all shipping iPhones while still offering the same price on a brand new model that you could only buy a 3 year old iPhone today. Even if it is not considerably faster than a 4S people prefer to buy a current year model and they certainly would also want LTE which neither the 4 or 4S offer which is another reason to retire them. LTE is building out very fast in the U.S. and over the 2 years you will own this phone you will appreciate that feature. Even the super cheap mid tier Android phones now include LTE.

 

I am just making an educated guess and we will have to wait a few months and see what they release. So are you saying they will just continue current policy and retire the 4 and move the 4S and 5 into those slots? 


Edited by gwmac - 6/23/13 at 1:20pm
post #96 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

[...] So are you saying they will just continue current policy and retire the 4 and move the 4S and 5 into those slots? 

 

No, he's saying that hitting the $450 price point fails to overcome the stated objection no matter WHICH phone you drop into that slot.

 

If there IS going to be a new, less expensive iPhone, whether or not it is better than the current offering is irrelevant. The stated rational for its existence is that Apple's phones are too expensive for outright purchase in less affluent, unsubsidized markets. If buyers can't afford $450 for the current model, how are they going to manage $450 for a newer model? It being "better" doesn't matter to a buyer who can't afford it.

 

I'm not saying he's right or wrong, but the logic is sound. *IF* the reason for building an additional model is to make it accessible to poorer buyers, hitting an existing price point isn't the way to do it.

post #97 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

Nope not forgetting it at all. That phone is nearly 3 years old now. I am talking about selling a brand new current year iPhone for $449 which is a very big difference vs. selling one 3 years old. Doesn't the 4 also only include 8GB? The one I expect Apple to release would have 16GB as well as LTE. My product matrix makes sense because in one fell swoop Apple can ditch 3.5" forever as well as 30 pin and move to 4" and lightning for all shipping iPhones while still offering the same price on a brand new model that you could only buy a 3 year old iPhone today. Even if it is not considerably faster than a 4S people prefer to buy a current year model and they certainly would also want LTE which neither the 4 or 4S offer which is another reason to retire them. LTE is building out very fast in the U.S. and over the 2 years you will own this phone you will appreciate that feature. Even the super cheap mid tier Android phones now include LTE.

I am just making an educated guess and we will have to wait a few months and see what they release. So are you saying they will just continue current policy and retire the 4 and move the 4S and 5 into those slots?

I see.

Then maybe we should stop using terms like "cheaper iPhone" or "low-cost iPhone" if it's gonna be the same price.

I do agree that it's time to ditch the 3.5" screen and 30-pin Dock Connector to make a new entry-level iPhone. That's a great idea.

But please... don't call it a "cheaper" iPhone unless it is actually cheaper.

Also... you seem to be hung up on the "3 year old" thing. The chips in the iPhone 4 are brand new... they're just slower by today's standards.

Apple would never use the same processor in the entry-level phone that they use in the flagship. They gotta have some differentiation.

So what's the difference between a "new" slower chip and a chip that was designed 3 years ago that just happens to be slower by comparison? They've already done the work... the fabs are producing the chips... why throw them out to make new slower chips?

You're right... the iPhone 4 still uses the A4 processor it had when it first came out. The 4S got the A5 chip... and the iPhone 5 got the A6 chip.

But if the iPhone 4 used the A5 chip... that would essentially make it an iPhone 4S. I know there was a better camera, microphones and other stuff... but still.

I don't know if Apple will continue the current policy... but it worked for quite a while. If you're only gonna make one new phone each year... it makes sense to roll the older models down the line... instead of coming up with "new" cheaper phones to occupy the lower price ranges.
post #98 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post


I see.

Then maybe we should stop using terms like "cheaper iPhone" or "low-cost iPhone" if it's gonna be the same price.

I do agree that it's time to ditch the 3.5" screen and 30-pin Dock Connector to make a new entry-level iPhone. That's a great idea.

But please... don't call it a "cheaper" iPhone unless it is actually cheaper.

Also... you seem to be hung up on the "3 year old" thing. The chips in the iPhone 4 are brand new... they're just slower by today's standards.

Apple would never use the same processor in the entry-level phone that they use in the flagship. They gotta have some differentiation.

So what's the difference between a "new" slower chip and a chip that was designed 3 years ago that just happens to be slower by comparison? They've already done the work... the fabs are producing the chips... why throw them out to make new slower chips?

You're right... the iPhone 4 still uses the A4 processor it had when it first came out. The 4S got the A5 chip... and the iPhone 5 got the A6 chip.

But if the iPhone 4 used the A5 chip... that would essentially make it an iPhone 4S. I know there was a better camera, microphones and other stuff... but still.

I don't know if Apple will continue the current policy... but it worked for quite a while. If you're only gonna make one new phone each year... it makes sense to roll the older models down the line... instead of coming up with "new" cheaper phones to occupy the lower price ranges.

 

The reason I called it cheaper is that it will be cheaper than the standard iPhone @ $649 vs. $449 and both will be current year models. A $200 savings is significant and the older phones would no longer be sold if it is released.  But feel free to substitute more affordable, the frugal man's iPhone, or any other terms that works.  I just don't see Apple releasing a phone lower than $449. And even at that price I expect their margins to be extremely high with possible a $250 profit or more per phone sold. Apple could keep their margins and the public could get a more affordable phone as low as free on contract which is a win win for everyone besides mid range Android phones which would likely suffer far more with Apple competing earnestly in that sector. 

post #99 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

Right, because the "low cost" iPhone is going to be made out of the finest aluminium with the exacting chamfered edge. 1rolleyes.gif

This thing will obviously have a much larger battery, and probably internals similar to whatever the previous generation had. If it is also made out of aluminium like this, is much cheaper, and can be bought off contract, that would cannibalise something like 90% of the sales of the "pro" iPhone. Who's gonna buy a $600 iPhone, when there is a $100-$200 one with double the battery life and slightly slower specs?

It has to be a different value proposition aimed at a different segment of the market. This thing is done up to be almost identical to the current iPhone 5.

 

who said $100-200???
 
If real, this thing would most likely occupy the price bracket above the iPod touch and slowly displace it as it moves into the same price bracket.
 
between the iPod touch (AU$299 32GB,$399 64GB) and the iPhone 5 ($649 16GB)
 
Apple might be keen to discontinue selling the iPhone 4 ($450 8GB) and iPhone 4S ($550 16GB) from september so that iOS 8 can cull support for the older, 3.5-inch devices.
 
To prevent They can either limit storage capacity, internal processing power and formfactor. I doubt they would create eny advantages over the iphone 5S, including battery life.
 
At ~$499 16 GB outright this would be a great upsell from an iPod touch or an android. You'd lose storage, and thinness but I'm sure it's a tradeoff many would accept.
post #100 of 106

My guess is that this budget iphone is probably a reskinned iphone 4s. A5 chip, 3G, with the fatter form factor to fit in the antennae that aren't "outsourced" to the sides of the iphone any longer. 

 

Why not just resell excess 4s stock in other countries? It is possible that while the iphone remains highly desired, consumers may have qualms about buying a 2-year old phone model. This budget iphone would effectively allow Apple to remarket the 4s as a brand new model in these countries that want an iphone, can't afford the high-end model, and dread getting an older model. 

post #101 of 106
1) if Apple are going to introduce a cheaper phone the cheapest model will be cheaper than the 4S is now.
2) prices may well drop throughout all iPhones
3) the market has already priced in margin drops. The reaction to margin drops will be neutral - but if sales and revenue take off the reaction will be positive.
4) 7 years without price drops is a long long time in a commoditized market.
5) selling last years model is not ideal as it sells a device which has less is a shelf life, in terms of OS deliveries. Also it competes with its own secondary market.

Prices will be lower across the board in 2 years.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #102 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by abazigal View Post

My guess is that this budget iphone is probably a reskinned iphone 4s. A5 chip, 3G, with the fatter form factor to fit in the antennae that aren't "outsourced" to the sides of the iphone any longer. 

 

Why not just resell excess 4s stock in other countries? It is possible that while the iphone remains highly desired, consumers may have qualms about buying a 2-year old phone model. This budget iphone would effectively allow Apple to remarket the 4s as a brand new model in these countries that want an iphone, can't afford the high-end model, and dread getting an older model. 

 

All valid points. 

post #103 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

To imagine pricing for a new iPhone you have to look at current pricing. The base 16GB model is $649. I doubt that will change. It will get better specs and probably the base model will move to 32GB but I am confident that $649 price will stick.

 

That means the most likely price for a cheaper iPhone which would replace the 4/4S/5 models would very likely be a base model with a $449 price. 

 

Flagship iPhone 

32GB $199 on contract $649 unsubsidized 

64GB $299 on contract $749 unsubsidized 

128GB $399 on contract $849 unsubsidized 

 

Cheaper iPhone

16GB free on contract $449 unsubsidized 

32GB $99 on contract $549 unsubsidized 

 

I think this is pretty much what it will be. Prices could be $50 lower on the cheaper iPhone to break $400 but looks about right otherwise. Carriers will like it because they will have to subsidize a little less on the low cost model.
post #104 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


We don't know the spec difference yet. That will answer the question for many.

 

Probably a repackaged iPhone 4S with 4" Retina, LTE, unibody polycarbonate, and lightning port.

 

Apple could probably sell that for $400 off contract and recycle that design for the next few years with marginal updates. Throw in a selection of iPod touch like colors and you've got the perfect hook for a budget iPhone that is more palatable to emerging markets and budget minded consumers.

 

More importantly, it frees up Apple to go balls out on the iPhone 6 without worrying about coddling "legacy" iPhone lovers with an aversion to change.

post #105 of 106
I just hope they do not dumb it down in technology like they did with the iPad Mini! Low resolution screen and a 2 year A5 processor and little RAM. But I think that is exact what Apple is going to do!

I still waiting to see the 5S before I buy another smartphone. If it comes with an A7- quadcore and 2GB RAM and available in 128GB flash I may jump and buy it - if it is offered unlocked at the start! If not; then I just keep my current phone until it comes unlocked and then re-evaluate the marketplace.
post #106 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Wild View Post

I just hope they do not dumb it down in technology like they did with the iPad Mini! Low resolution screen and a 2 year A5 processor and little RAM.

1. No other processor would have afforded the same battery.
2. No retina screens existed, nor do they still.
Quote:
But I think that is exact what Apple is going to do!

... It's the low-cost iPhone. The low-co–someone physically restrain me. 1oyvey.gif1hmm.gif
Quote:
If it comes with an A7- quad core and 2GB RAM and available in 128GB flash I may jump and buy it

Sounds about right, actually.
Quote:
- if it is offered unlocked at the start!

Not going to happen and you know it. And you'd be fine with paying $849 for a phone that you'll just be forced to get a contract with anyway?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › New 3D renderings show expected design of Apple's low-cost iPhone