Apple to expand reach with new smaller iPhone, enhanced MobileMe

123457

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by battlehamster View Post


    Forgive my terrible editing skills..







    I think something this is more likely.







    And no apps (at first) that aren't built-in. Just a feature phone that does phone calls, music and takes pictures. Mass produced, shipped world-wide for under a hundred bucks.



    At least that's what I would do if I was Apple (and entered the feature phone market at all).
  • Reply 122 of 158
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dualie View Post


    It's not the cost of the phone that's the problem, it's the high cost of the monthly phone plans.



    They are related.
  • Reply 123 of 158
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dualie View Post


    It's not the cost of the phone that's the problem, it's the high cost of the monthly phone plans.





    The new phone will not have a cellular radio. It will be IP only used through MobileMe and it won't have a keyboard either. It will be voice recognition and text to voice with translation for email and TXT. The only search will be with maps and it will not have local music or a browser. It will have internet radio, but no video, or camera. $99.
  • Reply 124 of 158
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    The new phone will not have a cellular radio. It will be IP only used through MobileMe and it won't have a keyboard either. It will be voice recognition and text to voice with translation for email and TXT. The only search will be with maps and it will not have local music or a browser. It will have internet radio, but no video, or camera. $99.



    Gosh, that sounds like the iPod nano without a music library.



    If it doesnt have a cellular radio it is not a phone. Not having a keyboard makes no sense, voice is a crap interface ( try correcting it without a keyboard). Why not have music ( streamed), why not have a browser?



    Apple just need to reduce their margins at the lower end, the only reason to make it smaller is product differentiation, they can take the hit on margins at $199 ( kicking out the keyboard and browser makes no difference to cost).



    . Why you have suggested is not even an iPod, its just a rubbish mobile device for location. Nobody would buy that.
  • Reply 125 of 158
    irelandireland Posts: 17,799member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    I think something like this is more likely.







    I was thinking something more like this size:



  • Reply 126 of 158
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Seems to me that if Apple were going to go the feature phone route, they'd have to reinvent the category in some impressive sense.



    As it stands, feature phones are a shrinking market, rapidly being supplanted by smart phones. And why not? You can get them for free on contract, and if all you want to do is email, surf, text and access some media, even the cheapest Android phone is going to be easier to use than the average feature phone, which is typically stuck in the old many buttons and buried menus format.



    So how does Apple compete against cheap Android phones by offering less functionality? My guess is they go all in on the rumored cloud services. Make a small phone that pulls most everything off Apple's servers. A cheap streaming iTunes client.



    Of course the big problem here is that the real cost of smart phone ownership is in the data plan, and a streaming heavy phone is unlikely to be getting special carrier deals to keep those costs low. That is, in fact, one of the only reasons left to bother with a feature phone, but at least in the US the carriers are typically tacking on data charges even for very modestly capable handsets. Still, consumers seem to respond to low initial handset prices, so a $99 iPhone mini with access to all of your iTunes media without needing much onboard memory might be a winner.
  • Reply 127 of 158
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member
    Agreed: The feature phone makes no sense. Feature phones are dead.



    There is an Android phone selling for £99 in the UK,with - on paper - impressive specs. Good screen. Looks good. 1GHz processor. Android 2.1. That is PAYG price. No subsidy ( you do have to buy the first months data from Orange at £10 - how bad).



    Apple dont need to go that low, as their brand will justify a premium, but that the £99 ZTE proves is this: by 2015 most of the mobile industry, which is 1.5 B units a year ( 15 times PC) will be smart phones. Dumb phones have no future. Remember the price point that ZTE are going to sell for by then is £49, or lower.





    Orange PAYG ZTE
  • Reply 128 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post


    Agreed: The feature phone makes no sense. Feature phones are dead.



    Mine's been running fine for the past five years.



    Having said that, Apple wouldn't make an iPhone that can't run apps. It's pretty simple to get.
  • Reply 129 of 158
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member
    Dying, then. Features phones are not going to matter in a few years, not going to win the phone market share war. I cant really see Apple winning either, but it has a chance of coming second. ( And maybe first on app downloads).
  • Reply 130 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post


    Agreed: The feature phone makes no sense. Feature phones are dead.



    There is an Android phone selling for £99 in the UK,with - on paper - impressive specs. Good screen. Looks good. 1GHz processor. Android 2.1. That is PAYG price. No subsidy ( you do have to buy the first months data from Orange at £10 - how bad).



    Apple dont need to go that low, as their brand will justify a premium, but that the £99 ZTE proves is this: by 2015 most of the mobile industry, which is 1.5 B units a year ( 15 times PC) will be smart phones. Dumb phones have no future. Remember the price point that ZTE are going to sell for by then is £49, or lower. [/URL]



    Dumb phones have a future, especially in parts of the world where smart phones are too expensive for most people to own or use, and for pay-go phones everywhere. Not that Apple is likely to be much interested in either of these markets.
  • Reply 131 of 158
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    Dumb phones have a future, especially in parts of the world where smart phones are too expensive for most people to own or use, and for pay-go phones everywhere. Not that Apple is likely to be much interested in either of these markets.



    I think they are interested in PAYG. Thats some of the reason for this phone.



    My last non-smartphone was PAYG. Its not that rare outside the US.
  • Reply 132 of 158
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,729member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    Seems to me that if Apple were going to go the feature phone route, they'd have to reinvent the category in some impressive sense.



    As it stands, feature phones are a shrinking market, rapidly being supplanted by smart phones. And why not? You can get them for free on contract, and if all you want to do is email, surf, text and access some media, even the cheapest Android phone is going to be easier to use than the average feature phone, which is typically stuck in the old many buttons and buried menus format.



    So how does Apple compete against cheap Android phones by offering less functionality? My guess is they go all in on the rumored cloud services. Make a small phone that pulls most everything off Apple's servers. A cheap streaming iTunes client.



    Of course the big problem here is that the real cost of smart phone ownership is in the data plan, and a streaming heavy phone is unlikely to be getting special carrier deals to keep those costs low. That is, in fact, one of the only reasons left to bother with a feature phone, but at least in the US the carriers are typically tacking on data charges even for very modestly capable handsets. Still, consumers seem to respond to low initial handset prices, so a $99 iPhone mini with access to all of your iTunes media without needing much onboard memory might be a winner.



    I am not sure this rumour has any merit at all, but for the sake of speculation... the reason Apple might want to produce a cheaper, less feature rich phone could be as a low cost 'entry' phone to introduce new users to the 'Apple Experience'.



    As such I imagine texting and music would be the 'essentials'. A camera is also an 'obvious', so video would also feature though in a much lower res variety. I would also think a nano section in the app store would appear where dedicated apps will replace the functionality of a web browser along with games.



    The iTunes cloud service might be an available feature but would hardly be a selling point for a low cost iPhone. imagine the data costs! I imagine 8gb storage, conceivably also expandable through micro sd card, though I wouldn't bet on that one.
  • Reply 133 of 158
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member
    Look, if it runs Safari its going to be a fairly complex device and fast. Rather than create an iOS team to handle feature phones it makes sense to get iOS running on the device.
  • Reply 134 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post


    I think they are interested in PAYG. Thats some of the reason for this phone.



    My last non-smartphone was PAYG. Its not that rare outside the US.



    Maybe not outside of the US, but it is here (Apple's primary market). I'd be surprised if Apple made a play in this market, but they might, if they think it can be reinvented.
  • Reply 135 of 158
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    Maybe not outside of the US, but it is here (Apple's primary market). I'd be surprised if Apple made a play in this market, but they might, if they think it can be reinvented.



    Apple's primary market - are you sure? Apple is on multi-carrier everywhere else. The US is no more Apple's primary market than it is Android's.
  • Reply 136 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post


    Apple's primary market - are you sure? Apple is on multi-carrier everywhere else. The US is no more Apple's primary market than it is Android's.



    I think it still is, in terms of revenue, though I know it's getting to be a near thing. The point being, so far I haven't seen Apple design a product with a primary appeal outside the US market. In this market at least, pay-go phones are purchased by people with limited needs and funds. A pay-go phone with a data plan would be an oxymoron in the US market, at least from what I've seen.
  • Reply 137 of 158
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    I wonder, though, how much longer dumb and feature phones will exist (in any significant way), even in the poorest markets.



    My impression is that we're rapidly moving to the point that non-smart phones will have roughly the same relationship to the larger market as those dedicated email terminals that were around for a while-- intended for people that felt they couldn't afford, couldn't figure out or couldn't be bothered with "computers."



    The hardware cost is certainly being commodified to the point that there's little reason to not go the full smart phone, Android makes the OS free, and smart phones are actually easier to use (for basic functionality) than the average feature phone. Which leaves only the price of data plans as an obstacle for smart phones taking over entirely.



    So why not just sell a basic Paygo smart phone that's somewhat locked down to restrict data use? Enable the same features that that feature phone would have had, save yourself additional inventory and give your customers an easy upgrade path. You don't have to worry about jailbreaking, because the data usage is going to show up on the account and you can charge accordingly. Anyone trying to do an end run around data costs that way would just be shooting themselves in the foot.



    I'd bet that that's what's going to start happening-- very basic, somewhat locked-down Android handsets will start to replace feature phones, then dumb phones as the idea of carrying a phone that can't do a basic subset of computing chores becomes quaint and antiquated. There will likely remain certain extremely impoverished markets (like those targeted by the One Laptop Per Child initiative) for which any complex electronic device will remain a luxury, but note how quickly internet access has become an accepted part of life even in the less affluent nations. I think basic smart phones become the computer for those that can't afford more, and dumb and feature phones become pointless.
  • Reply 138 of 158
    So let me get this straight. Apple will offer a smaller, lighter iPhone, potentially using and advanced natural voice navigation system, and cloud-based on-demand access of one's content without sacrificing battery life -- cheaper than the full-sized iPhone?



    Since when did AI become as ridiculous as the Hollywood tabloids?
  • Reply 139 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rabbit_Coach View Post


    ...



    ...

    How about this one?



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klOptnFNgQo







    Yea but that video shrinks the screen size down about a half an inch, now I'm thinking they'll keep the 3.5in size and shrink everything else... Here's a go at a no-home button look:







    Not crazy about it but yea. I don't think they'll fragment iOS further by making a new resolution or implementation of the software. The app store should be a selling point!!!
  • Reply 140 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    I wonder, though, how much longer dumb and feature phones will exist (in any significant way), even in the poorest markets.



    If you're saying that the providers have a great incentive to sell customers on more data consumption, I'd say yes. But currently at least in the US market, pay-go phones are sold in $39 blister packs at Wal-Mart, so I think it's a reach for this market to be buying into data, even on a metered basis. If Apple dives into this market, I think they're going to have to do it in some different, distinctive, and probably totally unexpected way. Going head-to-head with cheap is not the Apple approach.



    Random observation: If we can't seem to keep people from posting huge and mostly irrelevant images to this board, can't we at least stop them from quoting the frigging things back? Hanging would be too good for them.
Sign In or Register to comment.