or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Firm reiterates claims of entry-level iPhone this spring
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Firm reiterates claims of entry-level iPhone this spring

post #1 of 56
Thread Starter 
Although Apple has downplayed the possibility of a stripped-down iPhone, the Royal Bank of Canada is reiterating claims this week that the company is gearing up to announce two new versions of its touch-screen handset, including an entry-level model that lacks both 3G connectivity and an unlimited data plan.

The call came from analyst Mike Abramsky, who opened a research note to clients Tuesday by proclaiming that "checks reveal further entry-level iPhone details, including launches on existing carriers [in] June [or] July with a data plan, entry-level pricing and a lower subsidy."

Abramsky, who did not elaborate on his sources anywhere in the seven-page report, said the new handset would arrive in tandem with a "3G iPhone performance upgrade," or third-generation iPhone that would sport a new form factor, added features and outperform the existing model.

In a chart accompanying the report and attributed to RBC Capital Markets with the caption "best estimate at time of publication, specifications subject to change," the analyst constructed a side-by-side comparison of the two models he claims are on their way to market in the coming months.

New versions of the flagship iPhone 3G would supposedly fetch $199 and $299 for 16GB and 32GB models, respectively, after a $400 subsidy that would be absorbed by Apple's wireless carrier partners. Features such as UMTS/HSDPA connectivity, WiFi, Bluetooth, GPS and a two-megapixel camera would reportedly remain the standard, though the analyst claims the camera will be upgraded with video capabilities.

For screen real estate, Abramsky suggests Apple will stick to a 3.5-inch display but believes there's a possibility the company will employ a higher-density panel that ups the standard resolution to 720x480 from 480x320, a move that would somewhat mirror that of Japanese phone makers who've increasingly adopted 800x480 displays for their non-touchscreen handsets.

Meanwhile, the so-called "entry-level iPhone" would come wrapped in an enclosure similar but slightly thicker than the new iPhone 3G, adopting the same size screen, albeit at a resolution no greater than 480x320, according to the analyst. This model would forgo 3G connectivity for legacy EDGE support, lack GPS, and include a two-megapixel camera sans video, he said.



Apple would reportedly sell this model to carriers in an 8GB configuration for $299, which the carriers would then turn around and sell to consumers for $99 ($200 subsidy) alongside a "light" EDGE data plan with limited bandwidth for $15 per month.

Abramsky believes the move would be a play for unit volumes, something Apple chief operating officer Tim Cook categorically denied interest in pursuing during a recent conference call with analysts and members of the media.

"You know us, we're not going to play in the low-end voice phone business.Â*That's not who we are. That's not why we're here," he said. "We'll let somebody do that, our goal is not to be the unit share leader in the phone industry. It is to build the best phone."

Oddly, the RBC analyst acknowledged the poor economics of such a move in his report to clients, noting that an entry-level iPhone at lower gross profit margin to Apple would "appear less attractive" while simultaneously posing a threat of cannibalizing the sales of higher-end iPhones and iPods.

"We estimate the entry-level iPhone would cost $195-225 to manufacture, vs. the iPhone 3G at $300, assuming the exclusion of 3G (UMTS/HSDPA) chipset and royalties, exclusion of GPS, lower-resolution digital camera module, and component pricing declines on existing components (e.g. ARM processor, 8GB flash memory) along with assumed manufacturing economies of scale," he wrote.

Given these estimates, an entry-level iPhone would generate a 30 percent (or $90) profit margin compared to the iPhone 3G's 50 percent (or $300) margin, meaning Apple would need to sell three $99 iPhones to replicate the gross profit from one 3G iPhone, or 34 million units in total before 'breaking even' on the initiative. He believes 20 to 30 million of the devices will be sold during fiscal 2010.



Ironically, Abramsky followed his prediction of this margin-diluting strategy by maintaining his Underperform rating and $70 price target on shares of the Cupertino-based iPhone maker, saying he remains concerned of the "elevated risks to valuation from a possible growth and/or margin 'downshift'" for the company.

In an article titled "Mike AbramskyÂs bad AppleÂ*advice," published earlier this week, Fortune took the analyst to task for his most recent recommendations on the stock, noting that shares have climbed 27.5% in the past three weeks, meaning anyone who sold short the Monday after AbramskyÂs most recent downgrade "would have lost his or her shirt."
post #2 of 56
I think if we see a $99 iPhone it will be the current 8GB phone with the same subsidy from att. Then the 3rd gen iPhone will move into the 16GB and 32GB slots with other hardware improvements as well.

What I suggest doesn't make sense because Apple always seems to stop selling the last years model when the new ones come out, but they did do what I'm suggesting with the white macbook for a while until it was recently upgraded.
[ JUSTIN ]
[ @justin_horn ]
[ @whenwillapple ]
Reply
[ JUSTIN ]
[ @justin_horn ]
[ @whenwillapple ]
Reply
post #3 of 56
So much of this makes no sense at all.
  • A new iPhone that's the same physical size but twice the resolution? WTF?
  • A "lite" data plan? How does that make any sense?
This has to be confused reports of various things put together in the wrong way. On the face of it, some of this stuff is just ridiculous.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #4 of 56
Quote:
a move that would somewhat mirror that of Japanese phone makers who've increasingly adopted 800x480 displays for their non-touchscreen handsets.

actually, if you take a look at the sharp 931SH for softbank (same carrier as iphone 3g here in japan), you will find it has a 3.8 inch hxga touchscreen - thats 1024×480 pixels which equates to 298dpi. zang. and, again IS a touchscreen phone.

but, really, from my semi-professional opinion, this makes total sense as the way to go to "upgrade" the platform (iphone is certainly now a platform in the best sense of the word) - you can use the same apps, but due to increased gfx power, you can enjoy them at greater resolutions (with equal speed, and better texture density). kudos apple! and thanks! i am glad i waited this long!
post #5 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post

So much of this makes no sense at all.
  • A new iPhone that's the same physical size but twice the resolution? WTF?

Why doesn't that make sense? A higher density screen on the iPhone would make it look amazing.
post #6 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post

So much of this makes no sense at all.

I agree. The only reason I can see for Apple to get into the low margin telephony market would be to draw people towards the higher end models in the future. But that a low end iphone would have the same form factor as the present iPhone makes little sense. It would have to wow people with its usability and interface, and offer something beyond phone / ipod. Games is the obvious one with a separate category in the app store. Whatever it will be, if at all, it will be to bring in new users that are likely to upgrade in the future. If not, what's the point?
post #7 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_lha View Post

Why doesn't that make sense? A higher density screen on the iPhone would make it look amazing.

Well I was taking that as higher resolution not pixel density, but irrespective of the two items I picked out, I think my point remains. This is some seriously confusing sh*t. Sounds mangled to me.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #8 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post

Well I was taking that as higher resolution not pixel density, but irrespective of the two items I picked out, I think my point remains. This is some seriously confusing sh*t. Sounds mangled to me.

And 'higher resolution' equals larger display for you? Higher resolution means more pixels, if you keep the pixel size constant, you get a larger display, if you keep the display size constant, you get a higher density.
You make it sound as if higher resolution would be something else than higher pixel density, while in fact for something like an iPhone they most likely mean the same thing. Talk about mangled language.
post #9 of 56
This entry-level iPhone sounds like the 1st gen iPhone.
post #10 of 56
As this "analyist" doesnt seem to get Apple's product stratergy, and is pushing folk to sell whilst the price rises... I have to ask why are we bothering to listen to him?
post #11 of 56
RBC is a major investor in RIM, in fact even a depression RBC cannot find any bad things to say about RIM. Meanwhile they bash apple every chance they get.

RBC CEO even sits on Rim's board of directors!!
post #12 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post

And 'higher resolution' equals larger display for you? Higher resolution means more pixels, if you keep the pixel size constant, you get a larger display, if you keep the display size constant, you get a higher density.
You make it sound as if higher resolution would be something else than higher pixel density, while in fact for something like an iPhone they most likely mean the same thing. Talk about mangled language.

Only a person who resembles a plastic container used for flushing certain parts of the female anatomy would criticise someone *after* they admitted to a mistake. You must be proud of yourself.

Also you missed the part about where I said that it wasn't really my main point anyway, but by all means reply again and we might be able to drive the thread completely off track if we are lucky.



Edit: I just double-checked and I am right anyway, so you got an apology for nothing. While "resolution" usually refers to pixel density in a technical sense, the common usage of "higher resolution" is indeed more pixels wide by more pixels tall. Since the description in the article talks about a phone and screen of the same *physical* size, and yet a higher resolution in terms of pixels, that would seem to indicate that the images on the screen would become smaller than they are now (smaller keyboard etc.).

So yes, I think that deserves a WTF? or two.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #13 of 56
The entry level iPhone will be the used (or previously owned like with cars) iPhone when the rest of us trade-up!
Cubist
Reply
Cubist
Reply
post #14 of 56
This guy is supposedly an analyst and didn't analyze one huge factor as to why his described entry-level iPhone will not appear- AT&T has already kicked-down their performance on EDGE (supposedly to get people to buy new, 3G phones and buy 3G plans.)
Why would Apple introduce a lower-quality product that will perform worse? I don't have an iPhone yet, but many reports (and lawsuits) about how the 3G doesn't live up to expectations.
Will consumers be happy with an iPhone and the expectations that come from it performing worse than current available products? I think not. Apple has been too careful in their history to avoid this.

I just hope this analyst and his firm are not looking to manipulate Apple stock. Anyone and their mother can speculate what new products will come out. If you are giving investment advice, how about some proof, proof and more proof.

All they have offered are words.
post #15 of 56
Quote:
the so-called "entry-level iPhone" ... adopting the same size screen ... forgo 3G connectivity for legacy EDGE support, lack GPS, and include a two-megapixel camera sans video, he said.

Also known as "The Original iPhone".

Apple putting a new shine on an existing hardware configuration to sell the iPhone without a data plan is the most plausible rumor in here. It lets Apple maintain their margin on hardware that ostensibly wouldn't need a data-plan-level subsidy and it wouldn't fracture the app store or consumer expectations.

I can't imagine ATT would be too happy about it though. Unless they think they've pretty much hit the ceiling for switchers with the existing plan cost.

A straightforward performance bump for this year's 3G is also fairly reasonable/obvious. The rest of it is nonsense.
post #16 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riley View Post

RBC is a major investor in RIM, in fact even a depression RBC cannot find any bad things to say about RIM. Meanwhile they bash apple every chance they get.

RBC CEO even sits on Rim's board of directors!!

Seems like a conflict:

Barbara Stymiest
Ms. Stymiest, 51, has served as a director of the Company since March, 2007. Ms. Stymiest has an HBA from the Richard Ivey School of Business, University of Western Ontario and FCA from the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario.

Ms. Stymiest has been Chief Operating Officer of RBC Financial Group since 2004. Prior to this, Ms. Stymiest held positions as Chief Executive Officer at TSX Group Inc., Executive Vice-President & Chief Financial Officer at BMO Nesbitt Burns and Partner of Ernst & Young LLP. Ms. Stymiest is currently a Director of Symcor Inc., Toronto Rehabilitation Institute Foundation, the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research and the Royal Ontario Museum. Currently she is Group Head, Strategy, Treasury & Corporate Services of RBC: http://www.rbc.com/newsroom/down2-stymiest.html

Just how close can you get?
RIM, RBC and Thomson Reuters to anchor a $150 million BlackBerry Partners Fund focused on investing in mobile applications and services http://www.rbc.com/newsroom/20080512mobile.html

But in all fairness, RBC did donate $10,000 to the Apple program… http://www.rbc.com/newsroom/pdf/20070301hockey-qc.pdf
post #17 of 56
Not sure about the iPhone lite, but the new version of the regular iPhone should have some fantastic new features...
All the early adopters 2 year contracts will be expiring and ATT will want renewals as well as upgrades...
post #18 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeny View Post

Not sure about the iPhone lite, but the new version of the regular iPhone should have some fantastic new features...
All the early adopters 2 year contracts will be expiring and ATT will want renewals as well as upgrades...

All those early adopters probably already got a new two year contract when they bought the iPhone 3G for $199 in 2008. I'm hoping ATT offers the same deal again this June
post #19 of 56
A 300 USD phone is hardly a low end phone, at 30 dollars it is real low end.

To be an iphone it has to work as a iphone GUI wise but it does not need all features. Sp soemthing like the first generation iphone, with improvement in manufacturing can serve as a stepping stone into the iphone platform. There are ipods that are hardly high end and Apple make a lot of money on those as well.
iPhone core value
Phone, GUI, WiFI netsurfing apps

Expected extras
Camera, iPod, basic games (3G in Asia)

Extra features
3G, radio, GPS, video, 3D gaming

Apple has taken the lead with surfmobiles but they have both keep running ahead of the other ones as well as offer phones that are impressive but not at the (b)leading edge pricewise
post #20 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeny View Post

Not sure about the iPhone lite, but the new version of the regular iPhone should have some fantastic new features...
All the early adopters 2 year contracts will be expiring and ATT will want renewals as well as upgrades...

A subscriber with an expired contract on the original iPhone should in theory have an unlocked phone or at least a phone that they can use to get a month-to-month and/or voice plan.
post #21 of 56
I don't like the sound of what is essentially just a screen density, capacity, and camera upgrade. The iPhone's screen is already quite dense and nice looking. 32GB is a given, and yes video needs to happen (as does 2.3 or 3 megapixels IMHO), but really the thing Apple needs to concentrate on right now is getting multitasking and a good notifications system into the iPhone. I'm not planning on getting a Pre, but Apple needs to stay at the head of the pack in every way.
post #22 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by city View Post

The entry level iPhone will be the used (or previously owned like with cars) iPhone when the rest of us trade-up!

Exactly.
Don't expect revolutionary improvements in the iPhone.
Look at the iPod, every new model was an evolutionary step adding a few minor features.
This is important because if Apple introduces a model that is far superior, then current iPhone 3G owners will complain that their 1 year old phone that they paid $299 dollars for is now ghetto.
So expect significant minor improvements but nothing earth shattering.
post #23 of 56
This has to be one of the dumbest, least-informed rumors we've heard yet. NOBODY would release a non-3G phone at this time considering that the carriers are moving toward removing slower protocols/networks in the next few years.
post #24 of 56
Quote:
Given these estimates, an entry-level iPhone would generate a 30 percent (or $90) profit margin compared to the iPhone 3G's 50 percent (or $300) margin, meaning Apple would need to sell three $99 iPhones to replicate the gross profit from one 3G iPhone, or 34 million units in total before 'breaking even' on the initiative. He believes 20 to 30 million of the devices will be sold during fiscal 2010.


There is a tradition at 1, Infinite loop, to repeat mistakes because Apple never change and never learn from past mistakes.

Back in the late 1980's, Mac OS 4.8, Mac OS 5.0 and Mac OS 6.0 were competing against Microsoft DOS. It was easy to claim the superiority of the Mac OS based on its graphical interface, its Human Interface Guidelines, and the much higher price of the computers running the Mac OS operating system. But the price was higher on Macs because the Mac OS was not licensed to computer manufacturers and because Apple insisted on maintaining higher prices to guarantee a 50% profit margin on every Mac sold.

What was bound to happen did happen. Most companies and cash strapped students stuck with lower priced DOS computers running on IBM compatible clones sold with a normal profit margin of 15% to 20%. And when Microsoft caught up with Apple by introducing Windows 95 with its graphical interface, Apple was slaughtered because most people rejected the high prices of Macs in favor of reasonably priced computers running Windows. And the rest is history. Windows is installed on 90% of the computers while Apple's world market share is less than 4%.

Apple is repeating its past mistakes by insisting on a 50% profit margin for iPhones. As competitors catch up with Apple, Apple will loose its early market lead because consumers and companies know a good deal when they see it. And they have no inclination to save a company with outrageous prices.

Cut the billion dollar bonus to the CEO and upper management and run Apple like a business venture. Or else, history will repeat itself.


post #25 of 56
Well, let's be fair. The iPod was a high-end product for the first couple of years, but then Apple was aggressive about introducing cheaper models (Mini, Nano, and Shuffle) and started becoming price competitive as rival MP3 players made their appearance.

Also, Jobs wasn't running the show when Windows 95 came out.

Apple had no equivalent of OS X at the time. Windows 95 was good enough when compared to Mac OS. OS X blows Vista away.

Apple chooses carefully which businesses to get involved in. It knows it makes no sense to release a $400 minitower PC and get clobbered by Dell and HP's economies of scale.

The smartphone market is a new, high-end, and growing market. If Apple sees a smartphone that is a worthy competitor to the iPhone (perhaps an Android phone will come out), then it will adjust its pricing and features accordingly. For now, the iPhone blows away the competition, and they can afford the outrageous profit margins.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

There is a tradition at 1, Infinite loop, to repeat mistakes because Apple never change and never learn from past mistakes.

Back in the late 1980's, Mac OS 4.8, Mac OS 5.0 and Mac OS 6.0 were competing against Microsoft DOS. It was easy to claim the superiority of the Mac OS based on its graphical interface, its Human Interface Guidelines, and the much higher price of the computers running the Mac OS operating system. But the price was higher on Macs because the Mac OS was not licensed to computer manufacturers and because Apple insisted on maintaining higher prices to guarantee a 50% profit margin on every Mac sold.

What was bound to happen did happen. Most companies and cash strapped students stuck with lower priced DOS computers running on IBM compatible clones sold with a normal profit margin of 15% to 20%. And when Microsoft caught up with Apple by introducing Windows 95 with its graphical interface, Apple was slaughtered because most people rejected the high prices of Macs in favor of reasonably priced computers running Windows. And the rest is history. Windows is installed on 90% of the computers while Apple's world market share is less than 4%.

Apple is repeating its past mistakes by insisting on a 50% profit margin for iPhones. As competitors catch up with Apple, Apple will loose its early market lead because consumers and companies know a good deal when they see it. And they have no inclination to save a company with outrageous prices.

Cut the billion dollar bonus to the CEO and upper management and run Apple like a business venture. Or else, history will repeat itself.


post #26 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella View Post

Exactly.
Don't expect revolutionary improvements in the iPhone.
Look at the iPod, every new model was an evolutionary step adding a few minor features.
This is important because if Apple introduces a model that is far superior, then current iPhone 3G owners will complain that their 1 year old phone that they paid $299 dollars for is now ghetto.
So expect significant minor improvements but nothing earth shattering.

All I want is a search feature for Mail and an intuitive (or any) copy and paste feature.

Your argument against a far superior model is asinine. Technology evolves. When that person with a current "ghetto" 3g Iphone bought their current "ghetto" 3g Iphone it was a far superior product to the Edge Iphone. Far superior products introductions should be praised- how else do you think Apple is still relevant in the tech industry? By stepping out on a limb to bring cutting edge technology to the consumer.

Microsoft is the total opposite. It finds something that works and stays with it until it makes negative money for the company. Then it tries to improve the product by tweaking interface and jacks up the price and calls it a brand new OS, or Zune or what have you.
post #27 of 56
Abramsky believes the move would be a play for unit volumes, something Apple chief operating officer Tim Cook categorically denied interest in pursuing during a recent conference call with analysts and members of the media.

"You know us, we're not going to play in the low-end voice phone business."


It sounds to me like the only thing Tim Cook denied was entering the low-end voice phone business. The iPhone is a smart phone and there is no reason they wouldn't introduce a cheaper model alongside the new high-end model. You would then have a low-end iPhone for those who have not bought an iPhone yet due to cost and a high-end iPhone to get those with the current version to upgrade.

     197619842014  

     Where were you when the hammer flew?  

 

MacBook Pro Retina, 13", 2.5 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD

iPhone 5s • iPad mini Retina • Chromebook Pixel • Nexus 7

Reply

     197619842014  

     Where were you when the hammer flew?  

 

MacBook Pro Retina, 13", 2.5 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD

iPhone 5s • iPad mini Retina • Chromebook Pixel • Nexus 7

Reply
post #28 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

There is a tradition at 1, Infinite loop, to repeat mistakes because Apple never change and never learn from past mistakes.

Back in the late 1980's, Mac OS 4.8, Mac OS 5.0 and Mac OS 6.0 were competing against Microsoft DOS. It was easy to claim the superiority of the Mac OS based on its graphical interface, its Human Interface Guidelines, and the much higher price of the computers running the Mac OS operating system. But the price was higher on Macs because the Mac OS was not licensed to computer manufacturers and because Apple insisted on maintaining higher prices to guarantee a 50% profit margin on every Mac sold.

What was bound to happen did happen. Most companies and cash strapped students stuck with lower priced DOS computers running on IBM compatible clones sold with a normal profit margin of 15% to 20%. And when Microsoft caught up with Apple by introducing Windows 95 with its graphical interface, Apple was slaughtered because most people rejected the high prices of Macs in favor of reasonably priced computers running Windows. And the rest is history. Windows is installed on 90% of the computers while Apple's world market share is less than 4%.

Apple is repeating its past mistakes by insisting on a 50% profit margin for iPhones. As competitors catch up with Apple, Apple will loose its early market lead because consumers and companies know a good deal when they see it. And they have no inclination to save a company with outrageous prices.

Cut the billion dollar bonus to the CEO and upper management and run Apple like a business venture. Or else, history will repeat itself.



i think you're oversimplifying a whole bunch of things historically, and it's not clear to me how you arrive at the conclusion that history will repeat itself. apple is certainly a lot more assertive when it comes to their intellectual property and i don't think that jobs or his successor are going to give the 'crown jewels' away the way that sculley did to microsoft, when they 'settled' their legal spat.

'run apple like a business venture'?? are you serious? by that logic, microsoft should be shut down and the money given back to their shareholders...
post #29 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

There is a tradition at 1, Infinite loop, to repeat mistakes because Apple never change and never learn from past mistakes.

Back in the late 1980's, Mac OS 4.8, Mac OS 5.0 and Mac OS 6.0 were competing against Microsoft DOS. It was easy to claim the superiority of the Mac OS based on its graphical interface, its Human Interface Guidelines, and the much higher price of the computers running the Mac OS operating system. But the price was higher on Macs because the Mac OS was not licensed to computer manufacturers and because Apple insisted on maintaining higher prices to guarantee a 50% profit margin on every Mac sold.

What was bound to happen did happen. Most companies and cash strapped students stuck with lower priced DOS computers running on IBM compatible clones sold with a normal profit margin of 15% to 20%. And when Microsoft caught up with Apple by introducing Windows 95 with its graphical interface, Apple was slaughtered because most people rejected the high prices of Macs in favor of reasonably priced computers running Windows. And the rest is history. Windows is installed on 90% of the computers while Apple's world market share is less than 4%.

Apple is repeating its past mistakes by insisting on a 50% profit margin for iPhones. As competitors catch up with Apple, Apple will loose its early market lead because consumers and companies know a good deal when they see it. And they have no inclination to save a company with outrageous prices.

Cut the billion dollar bonus to the CEO and upper management and run Apple like a business venture. Or else, history will repeat itself.



I don't think Apple wants World Domination. Apple is targeted at the high end 10% users for who Apple prices don't seem to be high at all.
Apple had me at scrolling
Reply
Apple had me at scrolling
Reply
post #30 of 56
No way they are going to create an EDGE-only phone in 2009 for god sakes! It is much easier to just add a secondary data plan for ~$10-$15 that comes with a smaller monthly allotment of say 100MB or 250MB.
post #31 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktappe View Post

This has to be one of the dumbest, least-informed rumors we've heard yet. NOBODY would release a non-3G phone at this time considering that the carriers are moving toward removing slower protocols/networks in the next few years.

Nonsense...
I know lots of people who don't rely on 24/7 connectivity, and for whom original speeds are quite sufficient for the occasional map lookup. for those (of whom I'm one), a more economical data plan and the lower battery drain would be quite attractive.
post #32 of 56
Banks have NO credibility.
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
post #33 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

Nonsense...
I know lots of people who don't rely on 24/7 connectivity, and for whom original speeds are quite sufficient for the occasional map lookup. for those (of whom I'm one), a more economical data plan and the lower battery drain would be quite attractive.

Until they actually bought one. Or better yet, until they brought one out.
post #34 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

There is a tradition at 1, Infinite loop, to repeat mistakes because Apple never change and never learn from past mistakes.

Back in the late 1980's, Mac OS 4.8, Mac OS 5.0 and Mac OS 6.0 were competing against Microsoft DOS. It was easy to claim the superiority of the Mac OS based on its graphical interface, its Human Interface Guidelines, and the much higher price of the computers running the Mac OS operating system. But the price was higher on Macs because the Mac OS was not licensed to computer manufacturers and because Apple insisted on maintaining higher prices to guarantee a 50% profit margin on every Mac sold.

What was bound to happen did happen. Most companies and cash strapped students stuck with lower priced DOS computers running on IBM compatible clones sold with a normal profit margin of 15% to 20%. And when Microsoft caught up with Apple by introducing Windows 95 with its graphical interface, Apple was slaughtered because most people rejected the high prices of Macs in favor of reasonably priced computers running Windows. And the rest is history. Windows is installed on 90% of the computers while Apple's world market share is less than 4%.

Apple is repeating its past mistakes by insisting on a 50% profit margin for iPhones. As competitors catch up with Apple, Apple will loose its early market lead because consumers and companies know a good deal when they see it. And they have no inclination to save a company with outrageous prices.

Cut the billion dollar bonus to the CEO and upper management and run Apple like a business venture. Or else, history will repeat itself.



That's not quite what happened! Apple had most of the market. IBM was struggling, so they allowed compatible clones. That made Mircosoft rich, but did substantial damage to both IBM and Apple sales. Apple clones would not have help Apple at the time. Eventually (under a different CEO) allowing a PowerPC clone just took Apple market share away. Also, the cheap computers and Apple computers are not equal. I don't think your profit margin claims are correct
Cubist
Reply
Cubist
Reply
post #35 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post

Until they actually bought one. Or better yet, until they brought one out.

Well, to tell you the truth, my best fit at the moment is a phone-touch... no data at all.
Just voice, wifi, camera.
post #36 of 56
looking at how Banks and Financial institutions have brought the world to ruin due to their lack of foresight and false predictions I call bullshit on this.
post #37 of 56
720x480 is a plausible screen resolution. The Nokia N80 was released three years ago and had a similar pixel density (256 PPI).

I'd love to see a decent camera on the next iPhone (what do you call the next iPhone? 3rd generation? ). 5MP with a proper flash (ala the SE K850i) would be ideal.
post #38 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post

Edit: I just double-checked and I am right anyway, so you got an apology for nothing. While "resolution" usually refers to pixel density in a technical sense, the common usage of "higher resolution" is indeed more pixels wide by more pixels tall. Since the description in the article talks about a phone and screen of the same *physical* size, and yet a higher resolution in terms of pixels, that would seem to indicate that the images on the screen would become smaller than they are now (smaller keyboard etc.).

So yes, I think that deserves a WTF? or two.

It wouldn't be difficult to update iPhone OS X to allow for the greater resolution. The 50% on the x and y would make sense.

The only difficult part would be the iPhone SDK. Not getting developers to update their apps, but pushing out the SDK while keeping this new iPhone secret. I think that Apple would have to pre-announce this new device ahead of time to prepare developers. Perhaps at WWDC.

PS: While I think this rumour source is BSing, I don't see how Apple can grow the iPhone brand without eventually introducing a simpler, cheaper iPhone.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #39 of 56
I have an iPod Touch which I find is a terrific product. I'm using it more than I had anticipated I would.

In any case, in regards to screen resolution, I can't see the value of upping the resolution. Movies look marvelous on this device already. I for one couldn't see more detail even if it were there and I'm not getting any younger so if anything it will get worse.

More importantly, if you increase screen resolution, all that does is force the processor to work harder and takes up drive space with bigger files. That in turn would also negatively impact battery life. If there were a payoff for that, then it would be worth it, but there isn't.

Seems to me that it's not Apple's modus operandi to do something just for the sake of appearing to have upgraded specs. There is no real gain from making the iPhone/Touch screen any denser and numerous drawbacks to doing so. If customers were complaining about the current product's picture quality, there'd be something for Apple to consider but I think far more customers would prefer longer battery life, something that can always be improved and has consistently been improved with each generation of iPod. Customers also long for more storage space which has likewise been upgraded. More pixels for an already terrific screen runs counter to both of those.

If Apple were to release a device with more resolution, I would hope that would be because it had a larger screen, something that could come in handy for surfing the net, reading, gameplay, etc. Even that move would have to be done in moderation. Make the screen too big and you lose a lot of the advantages of the iPod form factor. And such a device would, I would think, be a complimentary device, as opposed to replacing existing devices.
post #40 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Abramsky believes the move would be a play for unit volumes, something Apple chief operating officer Tim Cook categorically denied interest in pursuing during a recent conference call with analysts and members of the media.

Oddly, the RBC analyst acknowledged the poor economics of such a move in his report to clients, noting that an entry-level iPhone at lower gross profit margin to Apple would "appear less attractive" while simultaneously posing a threat of cannibalizing the sales of higher-end iPhones and iPods.

Ironically, Abramsky followed his prediction of this margin-diluting strategy by maintaining his Underperform rating and $70 price target on shares of the Cupertino-based iPhone maker, saying he remains concerned of the "elevated risks to valuation from a possible growth and/or margin 'downshift'" for the company.

(and finally...)

Quote:
In an article titled "Mike Abramskys bad Apple*advice," published earlier this week, Fortune took the analyst to task for his most recent recommendations on the stock, noting that shares have climbed 27.5% in the past three weeks, meaning anyone who sold short the Monday after Abramskys most recent downgrade "would have lost his or her shirt."

<sigh> Another 'analyst' contradicting himself..

So in other words...

"Apple is going to do this incredibly stupid business move that even I recognize as stupid, and it will ultimately cause them to lose lots of money...
....but Apple will do it anyway. Therefore I predict that Apple's stock will go down."

-_- Not to mention he's already been proven to be clueless.


Again...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Firm reiterates claims of entry-level iPhone this spring