or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › 'iPhone 6' will lack sapphire cover but gain 128GB variant, analyst Ming-Chi Kuo says
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

'iPhone 6' will lack sapphire cover but gain 128GB variant, analyst Ming-Chi Kuo says

post #1 of 51
Thread Starter 
Apple's "iPhone 6" will not feature a scratch-resistant sapphire screen cover, but both the 4.7- and 5.5-inch versions will come with new higher-capacity options of 128 gigabytes of storage, a barometric pressure sensor, and a programmable power button, according to one well-connected insider.

Alleged 4.7-inch and 5.5-inch iPhone 6 mockups with iPhone 5s. | Source: TechSmartt via YouTube


Analyst Ming-Chi Kuo of KGI Securities revealed in a new research note on Thursday, a copy of which was obtained by AppleInsider, that he expects both sizes of the new iPhone to be unveiled at Apple's Sept. 9 media event. However, he doesn't expect shipments of the jumbo-sized 5.5-inch model to ramp up until later this year.

As a result, Kuo believes the 5.5-inch "iPhone 6" may not debut until sometime after its smaller 4.7-inch brethren. He also believes Apple may have difficulty keeping up with demand for the larger variant through the end of 2014.

But he does expect that both models will offer 128 gigabyte versions, which would double the current maximum capacity of 64 gigabytes found in the iPhone 5s. Apple already offers 128-gigabyte versions of its larger iPad Air and iPad mini.

In addition, Kuo also said Thursday that the "iPhone 6" will boast a barometric pressure sensor, which he believes will provide support for more indoor navigation applications, as well as new health-related functions related to spirometry.

Kuo also believes the next iPhone will have a programmable power button, which he said will be "programmable to being integrated with specific applications." The "iPhone 6" is believed to move the power button from the top of the device to the right side, allowing more easily for one-handed use with larger 4.7- and 5.5-inch screens.

"iPhone 6" and "iPhone 6c" concepts by Martin Hajek.


While Kuo sees those new additions coming once the "iPhone 6" is formally unveiled next week, one feature he doesn't expect to see is a costly sapphire display cover.

Sapphire screen hype for the "iPhone 6" was largely driven by hopeful fans after Apple signed a $578 million deal with GT Advanced Technology for supply of the material. But Apple already uses sapphire on the Touch ID fingerprint sensor for the iPhone 5s, as well as the rear camera lens on the iPhone 5s and iPhone 5c, and use of the material is expected to expand even further this year with new iPhone and iPad models -- uses that could explain the exclusive arrangement.

Apple is set to hold an event next Tuesday, Sept. 9, where it is widely expected to show off its latest iPhones, as well as offer a sneak peek at the company's wearable "iWatch." Kuo also believes that Apple will debut a new iPad Air at the jam-packed event, adding a Touch ID fingerprint sensor and new gold color option to the company's full-size tablet.

The keynote presentation from the Flint Center in Cupertino, Calif., will kick off at 10 a.m. Pacific, 1 p.m. Eastern. AppleInsider will be there with full, live coverage of Apple's announcements. For up-to-the-minute alerts, be sure to install the official AppleInsider app on your iPhone and iPad.
post #2 of 51
So not only does AI label this guess work packaged as a research note as "Breaking" it has to split it up in to multiple posts? Why do Apple rumor sites give Ming-Chi Kuo so much real estate?
post #3 of 51
Yes. I'm ok with that. Pretty much what I expected:

4.7" iPhone 6
16 GB - $199
64 GB - $299
128 GB - $399

5.5" iPhone 6
16 GB - $299
64 GB - $399
128 GB - $499

Come the event, we'll see if this is not 100% ^
I'm really confident in it right now.
post #4 of 51
"Key spec forecasts – No sapphire cover lens, 128GB, built-in barometer pressure sensor & programmable power key"

So Apple's ramping up sapphire production only to ditch it on the camera lens?
post #5 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

So not only does AI label this guess work packaged as a research note as "Breaking" it has to split it up in to multiple posts? Why do Apple rumor sites give Ming-Chi Kuo so much real estate?

Then don't read and comment on it. Stop complaining so much. This site has to make money somehow and you'd do the same thing if you wanted to run a site that didn't charge a fee.
post #6 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Kuo also believes the next iPhone will have a programmable power button, which he said will be "programmable to being integrated with specific applications."

Normally he only writes his opinions on the HW side no? So how come he now writes about software, did he gain access to iOS8 that shows the sleep/wake button is now programmable?
How to enter the Apple logo  on iOS:
/Settings/Keyboard/Shortcut and paste in  which you copied from an email draft or a note. Screendump
Reply
How to enter the Apple logo  on iOS:
/Settings/Keyboard/Shortcut and paste in  which you copied from an email draft or a note. Screendump
Reply
post #7 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

Yes. I'm ok with that. Pretty much what I expected:

4.7" iPhone 6
16 GB - $199
64 GB - $299
128 GB - $399

5.5" iPhone 6
16 GB - $299
64 GB - $399
128 GB - $499

Come the event, we'll see if this is not 100% ^
I'm really confident in it right now.

 

I think the 16 will be 32 and then 64/128 at those price points

I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #8 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post
 

 

I think the 16 will be 32 and then 64/128 at those price points


That is the same wish people have had every year for 6 years. We have a pretty convincing (and sensible) rumor to the contrary.

 

There is no reason for Apple to change the base model.

post #9 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirLance99 View Post

Then don't read and comment on it. Stop complaining so much. This site has to make money somehow and you'd do the same thing if you wanted to run a site that didn't charge a fee.

Doesn't explain why this stuff is labeled as "Breaking". And if you don't like my complaining you're free to ignore it. 1tongue.gif
post #10 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post
 


That is the same wish people have had every year for 6 years. We have a pretty convincing (and sensible) rumor to the contrary.

 

There is no reason for Apple to change the base model.

Sorry I don't see how there isn't a 32 in some way shape or form. 

I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #11 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

So not only does AI label this guess work packaged as a research note as "Breaking" it has to split it up in to multiple posts? Why do Apple rumor sites give Ming-Chi Kuo so much real estate?

Pageviews, silly.

 

We have covered this topic multiple times. This is an Apple rumor site that worships the Almighty Pageview. If you want news, go read the New York Times or Wall Street Journal.

 

If you want to read ludicrous twaddle that is wrong >95% of the time, along with hilariously asinine reader commentary, then enjoy this site (and others like MacRumors, 9to5Mac, BGR, Engadget, etc.).

 

But stop asking why the site operator post garbage. That's their business model.

post #12 of 51
Is the camera lens cover on the iPod touch sapphire?
post #13 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpantone View Post

Pageviews, silly.

We have covered this topic multiple times. This is an Apple rumor site that worships the Almighty Pageview. If you want news, go read the New York Times or Wall Street Journal.

If you want to read ludicrous twaddle that is wrong >95% of the time, along with hilariously asinine reader commentary, then enjoy this site (and others like MacRumors, 9to5Mac, BGR, Engadget, etc.).
Yeah I know these are mostly rhetorical questions. 1wink.gif
post #14 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post
 

Sorry I don't see how there isn't a 32 in some way shape or form. 


Because you haven't thought about it for more than 3 seconds.

 

16 GB is Apple's highest margin storage option, and is also the lowest price iPhone, and is also the highest selling model. They aren't going to want to mess with that in anyway. People that chose this model today do so with PRICE as the primary motivator. They don't care how much storage it has....just what's the cheapest I can get the 'new' iPhone. Apple has no reason to lose a dollar to two dollars per iPhone to those people by just giving them 32 GB instead.

 

However, for people who DO want more storage....the prices on 32 & 64 are getting ridiculous. If Apple were to replace 32 & 64 with 64 & 128, it would be tremendous jump in value for the user.

 

In this scenario, there is no room for a 32 GB at all....and everyone wins.

post #15 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post
 

16 GB is Apple's highest margin storage option, 

[...]

However, for people who DO want more storage....the prices on 32 & 64 are getting ridiculous. 

 

contradictory statements.

 

the margin on the 32/64 is much higher than on the 16, because they add $100/200 per level despite much smaller component cost increases. they make more on the 32/64 than they do on the 16 -- thus they have higher margins than the 16.

post #16 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by NolaMacGuy View Post
 

 

contradictory statements.

 

the margin on the 32/64 is much higher than on the 16, because they add $100/200 per level despite much smaller component cost increases. they make more on the 32/64 than they do on the 16 -- thus they have higher margins than the 16.


At the current price points. Try to change the price points and that all changes. They do not make as much money on a 32 at $199 as they do a 16. That is the point. It may only be a dollar or two difference, but that is still 10s of millions of dollars.

post #17 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpantone View Post

Pageviews, silly.

We have covered this topic multiple times. This is an Apple rumor site that worships the Almighty Pageview. If you want news, go read the New York Times or Wall Street Journal.

If you want to read ludicrous twaddle that is wrong >95% of the time, along with hilariously asinine reader commentary, then enjoy this site (and others like MacRumors, 9to5Mac, BGR, Engadget, etc.).

But stop asking why the site operator post garbage. That's their business model.
Beautifully described. Especially the asinine reader commentary part. Brought a tear to my eye 😢
You can't spell appeal without Apple.
Reply
You can't spell appeal without Apple.
Reply
post #18 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post
 


At the current price points. Try to change the price points and that all changes. They do not make as much money on a 32 at $199 as they do a 16. That is the point. It may only be a dollar or two difference, but that is still 10s of millions of dollars.

You're still wrong.

 

32gb @ $199 obviously costs Apple more than 16gb @ $199.  But you're wrong still when you say 16gb is their highest margin phone- or that it would remain so.

64gb and 128gb @ your proposed $299 & $399 price points would still be higher margins than 16 @ $199.

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #19 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post
 

You're still wrong.

 

32gb @ $199 obviously costs Apple more than 16gb @ $199.  But you're wrong still when you say 16gb is their highest margin phone- or that it would remain so.

64gb and 128gb @ your proposed $299 & $399 price points would still be higher margins than 16 @ $199.

Right, but his point is that if Apple makes the entry-level model more attractive (by giving it a very reasonable 32gb) then people are more-likely to choose that option rather than the next model up.  His "higher margin" language is faulty, but his logic is sound.  Except that Apple also has to worry about bargain basement buyers switching away from the iPhone.  So the baseline specs have to keep moving up at some pace.

post #20 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

Yes. I'm ok with that. Pretty much what I expected:

4.7" iPhone 6
16 GB - $199
64 GB - $299
128 GB - $399

5.5" iPhone 6
16 GB - $299
64 GB - $399
128 GB - $499

Come the event, we'll see if this is not 100% ^
I'm really confident in it right now.

This is possibly going to be the last year that carriers will sell devices subsidized.  

 Most of the US carriers are going to move towards a financing model permanently.   

So pricing will revert back to the same as it was during the original iPhone and the carrier will finance you.

It's a new shell game.

post #21 of 51

Looks like other OEMs are already putting sapphire on their phones. Huawei Ascend Mate 7 has it

post #22 of 51
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post
Why do Apple rumor sites give Ming-Chi Kuo so much real estate?


Maybe he’s sleeping with the entirety of the AI staff. You know, like that one gaming “journalist” who literally whored herself out to developers or whatever.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply
post #23 of 51

Please apple give us a micro sd slot, they are perfect for storing music, video, pictures, large apps like games, etc.  

 

A 128 gig micro sd card is $120 and is plenty fast for a phone or tablet, and far cheaper for us consumers than paying $200 for the 96 gig difference between 32 and 128.

post #24 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by TechLover View Post

Please apple give us a micro sd slot, they are perfect for storing music, video, pictures, large apps like games, etc.  

A 128 gig micro sd card is $120 and is plenty fast for a phone or tablet, and far cheaper for us consumers than paying $200 for the 96 gig difference between 32 and 128.
That is not happening. iCloud and network connectivity will become more ubiquitous before Apple ads any extra storage slots to their mobile devices.
You can't spell appeal without Apple.
Reply
You can't spell appeal without Apple.
Reply
post #25 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post
 


That is the same wish people have had every year for 6 years. We have a pretty convincing (and sensible) rumor to the contrary.

 

There is no reason for Apple to change the base model.

16gb is not much storage for a device that people would potentially use to watch video or substitute an iPad mini; more memory also means more space for iTunes Music media purchases. I can see Apple increasing the base model to 32gb. They have changed base model specs before so I can see them doing it again.

post #26 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by alcstarheel View Post


That is not happening. iCloud and network connectivity will become more ubiquitous before Apple ads any extra storage slots to their mobile devices.

 

So you are saying it will never happen, and I agree.  I don't really think that apple will ever offer a micro sd slot on any of their ios devices.  But I can dream. 

 

The unfortunate thing is that icloud and network connectivity don't come anywhere close to the reliability of on board storage.   Great for backups, but 100% worthless if I'm not connected to a high speed network like LTE or wifi.  Not to mention the cost of data these days.  

 

How sweet would that be to get the 128gig new device, and then slap in another 128gigs on a micro sd? 

post #27 of 51
Originally Posted by TechLover View Post
Please apple give us a micro sd slot...

 

It was funny the first year or so. Eight years later you just look stupid saying this.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply
post #28 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by TechLover View Post

So you are saying it will never happen, and I agree.  I don't really think that apple will ever offer a micro sd slot on any of their ios devices.  But I can dream. 

The unfortunate thing is that icloud and network connectivity don't come anywhere close to the reliability of on board storage.   Great for backups, but 100% worthless if I'm not connected to a high speed network like LTE or wifi.  Not to mention the cost of data these days.  

How sweet would that be to get the 128gig new device, and then slap in another 128gigs on a micro sd? 
That's the thing, though. If you're using a ad card it is not onboard storage. It is semi-onboard for a period of time. Yes there are benefits but it is outweighed by the work on the processor to access the storage. It creates inefficiencies. It creates extra components in the device. And it creates extra headaches.
You can't spell appeal without Apple.
Reply
You can't spell appeal without Apple.
Reply
post #29 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

It was funny the first year or so. Eight years later you just look stupid saying this.

 

Well thanks for that.  It's always so lovely when someone such as yourself personally attacks me on a forum.

 

Your attitude on this forum was likely funny at first.  But how ever many years, and 1000's of posts later, you just look stupid writing such a childish reply. 

 

Feel free to save both your time and the attitude, and don't respond to me next time.   I'll return the favor by ignoring you as well.

post #30 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by alcstarheel View Post


That's the thing, though. If you're using a ad card it is not onboard storage. It is semi-onboard for a period of time. Yes there are benefits but it is outweighed by the work on the processor to access the storage. It creates inefficiencies. It creates extra components in the device. And it creates extra headaches.

I don't disagree, but I likely don't know as much as you do about these things.

 

However there are some pretty smart folks working pretty hard over there at apple and I am sure they could figure it out.

post #31 of 51

No matter what it will be a good announcement, I just noticed on apples site they now have a countdown and show the invitation.

post #32 of 51
Originally Posted by TechLover View Post
Well thanks for that.  It's always so lovely when someone such as yourself personally attacks me on a forum.

 

Your attitude on this forum was likely funny at first.  But how ever many years, and 1000's of posts later, you just look stupid writing such a childish reply. 

 

Feel free to save both your time and the attitude, and don't respond to me next time.   I'll return the favor by ignoring you as well.

 

No, it’s not a personal attack to explain that the iPhone won’t be getting a MicroSD slot. Don’t act foolish and I won’t have to reply.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply
post #33 of 51

Re: storage, I think 32/64/128 is smart & 16/64/128 is idiotic.  Apple tends to be smart.

 

re:  sapphire glass:  skipping it would be idiotic.

 

Thing is, Apple really ought to take advantage of EVERY opportunity to steal a base from other manufacturers;  they have the supply, and the foundry, absorb the cost and make everyone else struggle uphill for parity.  LIKEWISE with storage:  Apple's flash costs are out of the bag, and Apple needs happy campers;  Apple released the 3 w/ 8gb, and the 4 & 5 w/ 16...32/64/128 brings more value to each tier, product positioning achievement unlocks, users continue to feel good about their choices.

 

That's what they risk by going cheap.

If yer gonna bother with thinking different, swing for the fences.
Reply
If yer gonna bother with thinking different, swing for the fences.
Reply
post #34 of 51

The material the screen is made of seems less of a "performance" aspect and so:: meh.

 

Granted I've never had a scratch on any of my iPhones so it's easy for me to be somewhat sanguine...

 

Now if or when that's introduced and it's addition is shown to have positive spillover for actual device performance? Then I'll "yay" along with everyone else.

 

But it does then puzzle over what they're doing with all that stuff they're making with GT Advanced Technologies at whom Apple has thrown a LOT of money....

post #35 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBRSTREETG View Post
 

16gb is not much storage for a device that people would potentially use to watch video or substitute an iPad mini; more memory also means more space for iTunes Music media purchases. I can see Apple increasing the base model to 32gb. They have changed base model specs before so I can see them doing it again.

Then choosing that size storage would be their mistake wouldn't it? And NOT a mistake for people who correctly anticipate their on-device storage needs.

 

Choice is good. So is making an informed one.

post #36 of 51

16GB low end is ridiculous given the large and growing sizes of apps.  If Apple could squeeze sufficient margins out of a low end 16GB iPhone 4 years ago, surely they can squeeze the same margins out of a 32GB or even a 64GB low end today.  

 

But this is the Apple we all know.  How long did they insist on selling Macs with 2GB of RAM, despite OS X's slothfullness below 4GB of RAM?

 

Thus they will continue to lose market share to Android phones as more loyal Mac and iPhone users reach a breaking point.  It's one thing to ask iPhone users to pay more for a superior device, but when Android phones are half the price and offer more RAM and bigger screen sizes, and all the apps most people want are also on Android, all Apple has left is iOS.  

 

I've been sacrificing money and specs to use OS X for over a decade, and I'll keep doing so given the alternatives.  But for mobile devices, there is Android, which is now pretty good (if not larded up by OEMs) and offers features not foud in iOS.  Most consumers don't want to sacrifice anything to use a device, and Apple's in for a shock when they finally learn this the hard way.

post #37 of 51
Originally Posted by Junkyard Dawg View Post

Most consumers don’t want to sacrifice anything to use a device...


Sales show otherwise.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply
post #38 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

Yes. I'm ok with that. Pretty much what I expected:

4.7" iPhone 6
16 GB - $199
64 GB - $299
128 GB - $399

5.5" iPhone 6
16 GB - $299
64 GB - $399
128 GB - $499

Come the event, we'll see if this is not 100% ^
I'm really confident in it right now.
I don't see why 32 gb is skipped.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post


That is the same wish people have had every year for 6 years. We have a pretty convincing (and sensible) rumor to the contrary.

There is no reason for Apple to change the base model.
Accept that it's a turn off for the buyer at $200 max price and that flash storage is much smaller then it was.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post

I think the 16 will be 32 and then 64/128 at those price points
That makes more since.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post

Sorry I don't see how there isn't a 32 in some way shape or form. 
That's what I'm wondering, possible 5.5 will be 32, 64, 128 but 4.7 is 16, 64, 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by NolaMacGuy View Post

contradictory statements.

the margin on the 32/64 is much higher than on the 16, because they add $100/200 per level despite much smaller component cost increases. they make more on the 32/64 than they do on the 16 -- thus they have higher margins than the 16.
That's the point, this would be higher margins on all
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post


At the current price points. Try to change the price points and that all changes. They do not make as much money on a 32 at $199 as they do a 16. That is the point. It may only be a dollar or two difference, but that is still 10s of millions of dollars.
That is true, still can be a turnoff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

You're still wrong.

32gb @ $199 obviously costs Apple more than 16gb @ $199.  But you're wrong still when you say 16gb is their highest margin phone- or that it would remain so.
64gb and 128gb @ your proposed $299 & $399 price points would still be higher margins than 16 @ $199.
Yes, that's why it would've favored.
Quote:
Originally Posted by malax View Post

Right, but his point is that if Apple makes the entry-level model more attractive (by giving it a very reasonable 32gb) then people are more-likely to choose that option rather than the next model up.  His "higher margin" language is faulty, but his logic is sound.  Except that Apple also has to worry about bargain basement buyers switching away from the iPhone.  So the baseline specs have to keep moving up at some pace.
I see this point, still those that ignore upgrades will be a turnoff.
post #39 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post

 
Sorry I don't see how there isn't a 32 in some way shape or form. 

16 GB is Apple's highest margin storage option, and is also the lowest price iPhone, and is also the highest selling model. They aren't going to want to mess with that in anyway. People that chose this model today do so with PRICE as the primary motivator. They don't care how much storage it has....just what's the cheapest I can get the 'new' iPhone. Apple has no reason to lose a dollar to two dollars per iPhone to those people by just giving them 32 GB instead.

Some do care, but it's hard to see how important more memory may be... After all 16Gb is a whole lot of memory. For my first iPhone and iPad I bought 16Gb models because I had no idea how quickly I would top out. It turns out I need more memory, but there was no way of knowing going in.

So I'd put the value for a 16Gb model down to people wanting to enter the stream at a low cost AND not knowing how that memory will be used up due to all the apps and utility of the device. Of course, by then a person has gotten hooked on the Apple experience and will stay and likely upgrade to more memory next time.
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #40 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Junkyard Dawg View Post

16GB low end is ridiculous given the large and growing sizes of apps.  If Apple could squeeze sufficient margins out of a low end 16GB iPhone 4 years ago, surely they can squeeze the same margins out of a 32GB or even a 64GB low end today.  

But this is the Apple we all know.  How long did they insist on selling Macs with 2GB of RAM, despite OS X's slothfullness below 4GB of RAM?

I'm reading this on an ancient MBP with an intel CPU and TWO Gb of memory, so your example rings hollow. Sure, Apple's base models often are underpowered for some users and just fine for many others.
Quote:
Thus they will continue to lose market share to Android phones as more loyal Mac and iPhone users reach a breaking point.  It's one thing to ask iPhone users to pay more for a superior device, but when Android phones are half the price and offer more RAM and bigger screen sizes, and all the apps most people want are also on Android, all Apple has left is iOS.  

Apple loses market share while increasing the number of users. What's wrong with that? It's a fact of life that the market for commodity products are huge and while the high-end brands have a smaller share they also have much better profit margins.
Quote:
I've been sacrificing money and specs to use OS X for over a decade, and I'll keep doing so given the alternatives.  But for mobile devices, there is Android, which is now pretty good (if not larded up by OEMs) and offers features not foud in iOS.  Most consumers don't want to sacrifice anything to use a device, and Apple's in for a shock when they finally learn this the hard way.

What Apple learned the hard way was that they cannot win with superior products in a race to the bottom on price. They have carefully crafted their brand to appeal to users based upon other values. Price and gee-gaw features are not among the reasons people buy Apple products. Keep this one thing in mind: Apple will not allow their products to be confused with commodity products. Every aspect of their marketing and manufacturing is pointed away from that fate.
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • 'iPhone 6' will lack sapphire cover but gain 128GB variant, analyst Ming-Chi Kuo says
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › 'iPhone 6' will lack sapphire cover but gain 128GB variant, analyst Ming-Chi Kuo says