Apple to expand reach with new smaller iPhone, enhanced MobileMe

1234568»

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by franktinsley View Post


    I could see this with maybe a non-retina display at the same size but with almost nothing around the screen. Home button would be replaced with a gesture and the voice control would be much more advanced and also available in the iPhone 5.



    My sentiments exactly. I think this would go over well with a number of present iPhone users and future users. Especially if they start offering it in different colors to boot.
  • Reply 142 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    He didn't remove the speaker of mic, he just has limited PS skills.



    Very very limited. I tried content-aware fill and suddenly I was filled with a sense of well-being and the ability to communicate to everyone via a telepathic cloud computing node that sparkled in the air like one million magical rainbows. But then I accidentally clicked undo.



    Anyway, I figure if its supposed to be 1/3 the size with no home button, and the two black bars are exactly 1/6 the size of the current width of the iphone 4... carry the 3, divide by zero, factor in the langrangianianianian point expression.. then maybe they could just shrink the guts of a 3GS and keep the same screen size. Jobs probably saw Ironman 2 and said to Ives.. make that happen.
  • Reply 143 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by frugality View Post


    Technology comes full circle?







    Where did you get that picture of me holding my big mobile phone? I still use it my new at&t Samsung the company gave me doesn't work.
  • Reply 144 of 158
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    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.



    Agree with you that Apple has no incentive to make a "feature phone", at least as that category is currently understood.



    But what I'm saying about the smart phones is that I suspect that soon enough it won't be much more expensive to manufacture a low end Android handset than it is to make one of those Samsung or LG or Nokia candybars that they sell with the prepaid minutes. So you sell a low end smart phone as your pay-go phone, leaving it to the user to refrain from running up data minutes on the cell network and getting hit with giant overage fees but still free to use WiFi for network access.



    If you're getting a pay-go phone in the first place because you don't need anything more than "just a phone", just use the phone app. Still easier to do phone things than a feature or dumb phone, which have notoriously terrible interfaces. If you just want a few feature phone-ish things, just use those features.



    I just don't think there will much point in leaving out smart phone functionality as long as you're making a handset, once the entire system is pretty much a single inexpensive chip. The touch screen is certainly an additional expense, but those are only going to get cheaper, whereas there probably isn't much scale or efficiency costs left to wring out of conventional small and low res LCDs. Like I say, it's similar to how there's not much point in making a dedicated email station, no matter if there may be some market for super cheap and super easy, because by the time you make that you really might as well make a computer and let the customer decide if they what to use in a limited way.
  • Reply 145 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    Agree with you that Apple has no incentive to make a "feature phone", at least as that category is currently understood.



    But what I'm saying about the smart phones is that I suspect that soon enough it won't be much more expensive to manufacture a low end Android handset than it is to make one of those Samsung or LG or Nokia candybars that they sell with the prepaid minutes. So you sell a low end smart phone as your pay-go phone, leaving it to the user to refrain from running up data minutes on the cell network and getting hit with giant overage fees but still free to use WiFi for network access.



    If you're getting a pay-go phone in the first place because you don't need anything more than "just a phone", just use the phone app. Still easier to do phone things than a feature or dumb phone, which have notoriously terrible interfaces. If you just want a few feature phone-ish things, just use those features.



    I just don't think there will much point in leaving out smart phone functionality as long as you're making a handset, once the entire system is pretty much a single inexpensive chip. The touch screen is certainly an additional expense, but those are only going to get cheaper, whereas there probably isn't much scale or efficiency costs left to wring out of conventional small and low res LCDs. Like I say, it's similar to how there's not much point in making a dedicated email station, no matter if there may be some market for super cheap and super easy, because by the time you make that you really might as well make a computer and let the customer decide if they what to use in a limited way.



    Good points. I believe what you're talking about is essentially an iPod touch with telephony, which isn't quite the same thing as an iPhone. Given their selling prices without telephony, I wonder whether the smartphone economies of scale have brought the costs anywhere close to the virtually-free pay-go phones you can buy now. Someday maybe, but for now I think we're at $300 minimum retail. Then you must have an easy way to toggle cellular data flow on and off, which the iPhone cannot do at all, as nearly as I can tell. On a whole, this seems like a great way to get less affluent customers in over their heads with data charges, which the carriers would like naturally, just as the banks like collecting usurious ATM fees from people who can't get credit cards.
  • Reply 146 of 158
    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.



    This phone would be directed towards emerging nations like China, India and Brazil - these and other countries where Nokia is currently on top. It's a chance to give people their first "bite of the Apple".
  • Reply 147 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    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.



    I know people think an Apple MVNO is preposterous but this is an example where they could create something unique. Imagine that instead of buying minutes, Apple exclusively bought data and handled calls through VOIP. Apple could build out an appealing set of data services which are unique to their offering. The only question then is if there is enough margin for Apple in the bandwidth they buy? But that could be where the patent that has carriers bid to provide services come into play.



    Once this system is designed, it could easily be rolled out wherever you have carriers anxious to sell unused capacity in bulk. Virgin has partnered with several MNOs around the world to provide Virgin Mobile services.
  • Reply 148 of 158
    For those hoping that the next iPhone has a bigger display, some hope:

    http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/14/...4-inch-screen/



    Quote:

    Rumors are flowing fast for the next generation iPhones. Digitimes is now claiming that the next generation iPhone will use a 4-inch screen to better compete with Google Android.



  • Reply 149 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post


    This is the only thing that makes sense.



    The other prototypes of an edge-to-edge screen on a phone will never work, because if you hold it in your left hand (if you're a righty) your fingertips will spill over onto the screen and confuse the touch sensors.



    they can make a 1/4 inch edge of the screen non-touch sensitive
  • Reply 150 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by penchanted View Post


    This phone would be directed towards emerging nations like China, India and Brazil - these and other countries where Nokia is currently on top. It's a chance to give people their first "bite of the Apple".



    Could, but again, it would be highly unconventional for Apple to target these markets with a new product.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by penchanted View Post


    I know people think an Apple MVNO is preposterous but this is an example where they could create something unique. Imagine that instead of buying minutes, Apple exclusively bought data and handled calls through VOIP. Apple could build out an appealing set of data services which are unique to their offering. The only question then is if there is enough margin for Apple in the bandwidth they buy? But that could be where the patent that has carriers bid to provide services come into play.



    Once this system is designed, it could easily be rolled out wherever you have carriers anxious to sell unused capacity in bulk. Virgin has partnered with several MNOs around the world to provide Virgin Mobile services.



    If I understand the concept you are describing, it potentially puts Apple in direct competition with their wireless partners. If it's strictly a developing world product, then it once again implies an utterly different market strategy than Apple has taken historically.
  • Reply 151 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by penchanted View Post


    For those hoping that the next iPhone has a bigger display, some hope:

    http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/14/...4-inch-screen/



    I don't believe a word of it.
  • Reply 152 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mercury99 View Post


    they can make a 1/4 inch edge of the screen non-touch sensitive



    So what's the point of it being SCREEN, then?
  • Reply 153 of 158
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    I think the iPod model is misleading-- that is, the idea that Apple inevitably expands the lineup with smaller, less capable devices that cost less. The iPod's interface was and is dead simple-- scrolling lists, left and right. Changing the screen size, or even eliminating the screen entirely, doesn't much get in the way of playing music.



    The iPhone and iOS is a platform. The platform UI is predicated on certain touch conventions, and those conventions require a certain amount of real estate. Talk of a iPhone nano started almost as soon as the original iPhone was released, I've always thought that the original iPhone was about as small as Apple could make it and still have provide the user experience they had in mind.



    So while I do think it's possible that further refinements of the hardware might result in a case shrink, I don't think they'll make an iPhone with anything less than a 3.5" screen. I also think it's pretty much out of the question for Apple to release a less capable iPhone as a budget model, any more than Apple would make a laptop running some kind of hamstrung OS X. It's just not their style.



    The typical Apple response to price cutting would be to sell the iPhone 4 for $99 after the iPhone 5 is introduced. I could see them doing the exact opposite with the iPhone 5-- making the screen larger while keeping the case size about the same. I don't think Apple is interested in competing with the Android screen race to ridiculous. The Android market is such that the only way manufacturers can differentiate their wares is to pile on the gimmicky or goes to 11 features; it would be a mistake to think that Apple worries that the iPhone will look wimpy compared to Android 5" mega-phones, which are actually bordering on stupid.



    So I say a 4" iPhone 5 with not much of a case size increase, a possibly case shrunk iPhone 4 for $99 as being the new lineup.
  • Reply 154 of 158
    jetzjetz Posts: 1,293member
    I could see a bigger screen. But a smaller screen? For what purpose. The way phones are heading, the iPhone is quickly falling at the bottom end as far as screen sizes as concerned. Pretty soon, the current screen size will pretty much be what most people would consider a "nano". I can't see value in going smaller. Going larger though, most certainly has value.



    And that's assuming Apple would change screen sizes and deal with the mess that entails, something I can't see them doing.
  • Reply 155 of 158
    juandljuandl Posts: 230member
    I am thinking that Apple is gonna remake SIRI's function.

    Right now it is supposedly made to recommend food and stuff.



    I am sure that Jobs & Co. said why stop there. Not everyone goes out to eat, and most nowadays will go to McDonalds.



    Now Music and General Commands almost all 'i' users will need. Especially if Apple would want to minimize the size of an iPhone for example.



    I think this is what will happen. You'll have the 'new SIRI' on at your request. They might offer a different microphone headset. You could request to open 'Locker' and play 'pack 1'.

    Or 'I want to see new episode Glee'.



    You will not need to see the screen all the time.



    That would work for me.
  • Reply 156 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    If I understand the concept you are describing, it potentially puts Apple in direct competition with their wireless partners. If it's strictly a developing world product, then it once again implies an utterly different market strategy than Apple has taken historically.



    An MVNO play would put Apple into direct competition with their competitors but would be the culmination of what Apple has been attempting since the iPhone launch - make the customer relationship exclusively between Apple and its iPhone customers. It would not preclude the carriers still offering the iPhone on their own network if there is enough money to be made, however nervous it might make the carriers (Apple would be trying to turn them into "dump pipes").



    The consolation prize for the carriers is the prospect of being paid large amounts of cash up-front for providing services. One thing which argues against it is that carriers in general are weaker on their data side than they are on voice (but LTE largely changes that) and may not have the backhaul in place to support another MVNO, especially if Apple decided to do provide all services over data. The idea cannot be total anathema to carriers as some already have such existing arrangements with MVNOs around the world though, to be fair, they typically partner with the MNO in setting up the service.
  • Reply 157 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mercury99 View Post


    they can make a 1/4 inch edge of the screen non-touch sensitive



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    So what's the point of it being SCREEN, then?



    The main purpose of a screen is to display content. If a narrow edge of the screen is not touch sensitive, you still can pan, zoom and slide content using large middle area of the screen. An elegant compromise IMO, but it will help to get rid of a side basel, achieving larger screen in a smaller form factor. The phone will also look striking cool with no left/right basel.
  • Reply 158 of 158
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mercury99 View Post


    The main purpose of a screen is to display content. If a narrow edge of the screen is not touch sensitive, you still can pan, zoom and slide content using large middle area of the screen. An elegant compromise IMO, but it will help to get rid of a side basel, achieving larger screen in a smaller form factor. The phone will also look striking cool with no left/right basel.



    I think you?ve pissed the point of what a touchscreen does. The point is for the input to have direct interaction with what is being outputted visually.



    Part of the problem today, even though Apple is better at this than the other OS/driver and HW vendors, is the lack of precise interaction at the edge of the touch panel area. That tells me a slightly larger touch area that is larger than the display size (not smaller than) would help for more precise touch display inputs by allowing more points of reference.



    Other things are more intelligent drivers and frameworks and better HW for input points that are closer together so styluses can be used with Wacom precision, but that?s something will come in due time.
Sign In or Register to comment.