RBC says sub-$100 "iPod phone" market open for Apple's taking - Page 2

Not at all. Apple is still a personal computer company at heart as none of their devices work properly without communicating with Tunes which runs on a computer. The idea isn't to jump into the commodity cellphone market where little profit is had or offer a stripped-down cellphone, the idea is to add a dressed-up iPod Nano. Apple sells iPods for $150 for 4GB and $200 for 8GB. As these prices drop as HW becomes cheaper Apple will have to cut margins or find a new angle. Since these need little to become bona fide phones, and it's something that Apple is now getting accustomed to, I think it's possible scenario. The add very little HW for a GSM phone and they get to jack the price up by quite a bit. After all, the consumer now can consolidate two pocket electronics into one smart device and doesn't have the costly iPhone 3G HW price and service fees. I don't think Apple of the market is ready for it now, but I do think it's inevitable and that prior patents can be construed to be leading in this direction. Remember, this helps sell the iPhone 3G and Macs later down the road as it pulls people off other cell phone brands while keeping them on iPod Nano for this music at the same time.

PS: I think an iPhone Nano that straps to your arm while walking/working out would be great if I could take a call if needed. I am not a heavy phone user by any means, but I do hate that I find the iPhone too cumbersome to take to the gym/jogging.

Nothing wrong with the Nokia one, it works fine. Syncs via BT without an issue on my phone, you tell it what playlist to sync from iTunes.

And the playback, well no issues there, it isn't as nice as an iPod, but then again, it isn't a dedicated media player

Yeah, you are right, Nokia does have issues selling a phone from 2002 (it was released in EU/Asia-Pacfic then). But at least you could capture video, and forward SMS messages on it...

Oh man, why in the hell would Apple introduce another phone now? Best to get the iPhone 3G working at its optimum level before introducing anything else. I sure hope that's what they're thinking. Sometimes there can be too much of a good thing....

I'm not sure why everyone claims Apple never releases lower end products to compliment their high-end offerings. Look at the iPod mini when it came out, then the transition to the nano. The iPod shuffle is an even more drastic example. And not only those, but people tend to forget about the Mac Mini, their entry-level Mac. It sells very well (relatively) and gives people a taste of the Mac culture, making these people want to get an iMac or MacBook (Pro) when it comes time to upgrade. I think a nanoPhone would be a wise decision, if only to get the masses that can't afford the high-end products at the time a taste of what Apple has to offer. Not the whole functionality of the high-end products, just a preview of it, basically.

So what is the $49 iPod Shuffle then, an imaginary product?

If you haven't noticed by now, the short history of iPhone price cutting has just shone that premium pricing doesn't work well in the cell phone business. A $99 simple prepaid phone/iPod? I'd buy two in an iPod moment for the kids.

I'm all for it.

Some people say that, because while they know it isn't rue, they simply aren't thinking when they post.

People should read their posts after they write them. It's amazing how that can make the difference.

I totally agree. It is the iTunes ecosystem and ease of use that would make an iPod/Phone work where so many others haven't.

Remember when iTunes didn't have the App Store, etc. Take what the name "iTunes" really means and go back to basics, which is an music player, and add a decent phone, like was mentioned above, and Apple would be kicking them out the door by the triple-digit millions.

Agreed.

You should probably follow your own advice, melgross, because there was nothing in my post that was false or irrelevant to the subject at hand. If you disagree with what I said, tell us why, don't just say it's wrong.

Jeepers, you need to go back and read what YOU wrote, because the way I see this Melgross was exactly right.

YOU ASKED this question:

I don't think he said what you said was wrong.
I think he answered your question, which is people post without thinking.

....... and then I think you proved him right by answering(without thinking).


That's just the way I read it, but then maybe I'm thinking too much.
(clearly too much for THIS thread....)

Apparently, your reading comprehension isn't what it should be. I was AGREEING with you.

The "some people" was referring to the people that both you and I were referring to in our own posts.

Example, my own post number 38, earlier than yours, which you apparently didn't read, or forgot when you posted to me:

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...4&postcount=38