Apple is predicted to drop the price of an existing iPhone to $200 unsubsidized in 2013, accelerating share gains for its smartphone platform in emerging markets....
This is stupid. Last year's iPhone for $200 is still $200 more than last year's Android phone.
This news doesn't really change the value equation much at all and it's difficult to see how it will have any impact.
This is stupid. Last year's iPhone for $200 is still $200 more than last year's Android phone.
This news doesn't really change the value equation much at all and it's difficult to see how it will have any impact.
I suspect it is more likely for Apple to design a new phone, perhaps based on one of the previous phones as a base platform but working to squeeze every dollar they can out of it while also, perhaps, trying to add some new value.
Apple is working on a lower cost phone option. It's really a matter of when and how, not if.
I have been messing with a 3GS that we still have since the wife got my iPhone 4 and I moved on to the 4S. It is surprisingly fast for the specs it has on it. Also most prepaid Android phones in that range do not have flash on the camera. That would be the only possible improvement I would hope they would add to the phone.
Otherwise keep it the same and ship it. It runs Asphalt 7 great as an example. It switches between apps faster than Android phones at double the processing power. Apple can sell a lot of phones at this price point and there will still be plenty to lust after in the iPhone 5.
In MP3 player market, Apple makes big, medium and small iPods. Although it started with the big, Apple put out medium, then small iPods eventually. As we all know, this strategy worked beautifully.
I think it makes sense that Apple makes medium iPhone at some point, and, even small iPhone eventually. It's just a matter of time. Apple will need to calculate its moves carefully. I think Cook can handle it. I think this strategy can work.
I suspect it is more likely for Apple to design a new phone, perhaps based on one of the previous phones as a base platform but working to squeeze every dollar they can out of it while also, perhaps, trying to add some new value.
Apple is working on a lower cost phone option. It's really a matter of when and how, not if.
Yep. Anyone who thinks Apple needs to make trashy, throw--away phones to compete with the trashy throw-away Android phones has completely misunderstood who Apple is and what value they bring to the equation.
I would buy a $600 iPhone and use voice and Wifi and a small data plan, if a carrier would offer it. I don't need lots of cellular data (simple map data, voicemail) and I do 95% of my browsing on WiFi.
The carriers are simply not interested in that market. Instead they are trying to move everyone to an expensive data plan and give away voice/sms.
If the rumors about the larger-screened iPhone 5 (or whatever we call it) are true, it may be that Apple is waiting for this as a way to differentiate the high-end iPhone.
Then I could see them re-designing and consolidating iPhone 4S, 4 and 3GS into one or two second tier, lower priced phones, all physically sharing many of the same parts (e.g., screens, batteries, CPUs, etc.) in order to get to the economies of scale on parts to help drive down their costs on those products.
So you could end up with something like:
iPhone 5 (high-end, larger screen, etc.)
iPhone 4x (mid price)
iPhone 3x (lowest price)
Where 4x and 3x are versions of the 4S/4 and 3GS redesigned for better consistency and economy of scale on components (plus leveraging everything they've learned since the original to make them less expensive.)
I suspect it is more likely for Apple to design a new phone, perhaps based on one of the previous phones as a base platform but working to squeeze every dollar they can out of it while also, perhaps, trying to add some new value.
Apple is working on a lower cost phone option. It's really a matter of when and how, not if.
I agree, but I believe mr. "analyst" was talking about lower prices on last year's phones.
Since the new lineup after October is going to be:
- iPad, iPad mini
- iPod, iPod nano
- iPhone, ?
I think that despite the regular ridiculing it gets on this forum, that they might be trying to produce something like an "iPhone nano" in the near future. It's pretty clear from the market stats and sales of Android handsets that the 4s is already much more phone than the average person needs.
Ugh, I hope this isn't more "iPhone 4 gets dropped, iPhone 3GS sticks around" nonsense.
Apple indicated a few months ago that it would be using the 3GS as an inexpensive (notice I didn't say cheap) pre-paid phone in emerging markets, among others. I believe the article I read mentioned countries like India and China as particular targets. I linked the article here a few days ago and can probably dig it up again if you need it.
EDIT: That article could have originated with Peter Misek rather than Apple, making it just a tad less reliable than I thought.
I agree, but I believe mr. "analyst" was talking about lower prices on last year's phones.
Since the new lineup after October is going to be:
- iPad, iPad mini
- iPod, iPod nano
- iPhone, ?
I think that despite the regular ridiculing it gets on this forum, that they might be trying to produce something like an "iPhone nano" in the near future. It's pretty clear from the market stats and sales of Android handsets that the 4s is already much more phone than the average person needs.
Wondering if Apple would pull an iPod nano on the phone in the sense that they did with the latest iPod nano...that is...smaller, simpler touch screen (but no real iOS like the iPod touch)...greatly stripped down and simplified functionality with the veneer of being an iPhone. It's an approach anyway. Shoot even without going full-on smart phone Apple could bring a lot to the shitty usability of so-called "dumb" phones. That might be the first step to take. I don't know whether it's economically feasible. But maybe it is basically a "smarter than dumb but dumber than smart" phone. Address book, calendar, music, iMessages...no apps. Like that.
All of that said, Apple's clearly trying to establish an iOS hegmony and that type of phone would not help (short term or directly). Still it might pull millions of people into the Apple ecosystem and get them on the track to iOS devices in the future.
Apple indicated a few months ago that it would be using the 3GS as an inexpensive (notice I didn't say cheap) pre-paid phone in emerging markets, among others. I believe the article I read mentioned countries like India and China as particular targets. I linked the article here a few days ago and can probably dig it up again if you need it.
+1 this.
Although I think the iPhone 4 would be the phone... I can't see the 3GS being kept supported under iOS beyond iOS 6.2 (if not 6.1). That's a lot of code forks to maintain, if the iPad Air/Mini/Small/Nano/Little comes to fruition. And you can't sell what you don't support.
You need to lower it in the US to avoid a back selling grey market (buy in india for ~$200-300, sell in US for < 375), lower the price to $200 here. Driving to an iPhone 4 also drives Facetime as a critical minimum feature (the question will be if Siri ever gets 'allowed' on the 4). And with Retina Display.
It's the emerging markets that Apple needs to lower the pricing umbrella, and Europe where pre-paids are the norm.
A company selling something at or below cost to gain market share? Apple or Amazon?
Apple won't do that.
To the extent that Amazon does it (e.g., with the Kindle) it's because they view their business model a bit differently. They're giving away the razors (Kindle devices) to sell the blades (books and other Kindle content).
Wondering if Apple would pull an iPod nano on the phone in the sense that they did with the latest iPod nano...that is...smaller, simpler touch screen (but no real iOS like the iPod touch)...greatly stripped down and simplified functionality with the veneer of being an iPhone. It's an approach anyway. Shoot even without going full-on smart phone Apple could bring a lot to the shitty usability of so-called "dumb" phones. That might be the first step to take. I don't know whether it's economically feasible. But maybe it is basically a "smarter than dumb but dumber than smart" phone. Address book, calendar, music, iMessages...no apps. Like that.
All of that said, Apple's clearly trying to establish an iOS hegmony and that type of phone would not help (short term or directly). Still it might pull millions of people into the Apple ecosystem and get them on the track to iOS devices in the future.
I do not think you will see any iPhone product 'forks' with a subset of the current OS. The iPod series save for the Touch is not iOS. iOS is about driving capabilities to mobile apps. A 'nano' phone would cause both OS and Apps to 'fork' their code, and mix their message.
Apple will not create a iOS 'consumer' 'pro' and 'enterprise' version of the phone in a forward motion (ala Microsoft). It's about increasing capability for same $$, not cutting existing capabilities to hit a new price point.
If anything, this is where Tim Cook just goes to the supply chain and tells them to cut their prices by 50% and increase shipments by 100% ['revenue neutral' to the supplier], because he knows how to do that.
I do not think you will see any iPhone product 'forks' with a subset of the current OS. The iPod series save for the Touch is not iOS. iOS is about driving capabilities to mobile apps. A 'nano' phone would cause both OS and Apps to 'fork' their code, and mix their message.
Apple will not create a iOS 'consumer' 'pro' and 'enterprise' version of the phone in a forward motion (ala Microsoft). It's about increasing capability for same $$, not cutting existing capabilities to hit a new price point.
But that's the thing...I wouldn't characterize it as any kind of iOS fork. iPod nano is not iOS in any way. It has the veneer of iOS-ness, that's it. They did this to bring iOS mojo to iPod nano without actually cramming iOS into that device. I'm suggesting the same possibility for an possible iPhone nano.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff
If anything, this is where Tim Cook just goes to the supply chain and tells them to cut their prices by 50% and increase shipments by 100% ['revenue neutral' to the supplier], because he knows how to do that.
If only it were that simple and easy. Sadly* these other companies also think about profits, not just revenue. Were it as easy as you suggest, it would have been done.
*Sadly for your theory, but happily because unprofitable companies have a nasty habit of going away fairly quickly.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Apple is predicted to drop the price of an existing iPhone to $200 unsubsidized in 2013, accelerating share gains for its smartphone platform in emerging markets....
This is stupid. Last year's iPhone for $200 is still $200 more than last year's Android phone.
This news doesn't really change the value equation much at all and it's difficult to see how it will have any impact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
This is stupid. Last year's iPhone for $200 is still $200 more than last year's Android phone.
This news doesn't really change the value equation much at all and it's difficult to see how it will have any impact.
I suspect it is more likely for Apple to design a new phone, perhaps based on one of the previous phones as a base platform but working to squeeze every dollar they can out of it while also, perhaps, trying to add some new value.
Apple is working on a lower cost phone option. It's really a matter of when and how, not if.
I have been messing with a 3GS that we still have since the wife got my iPhone 4 and I moved on to the 4S. It is surprisingly fast for the specs it has on it. Also most prepaid Android phones in that range do not have flash on the camera. That would be the only possible improvement I would hope they would add to the phone.
Otherwise keep it the same and ship it. It runs Asphalt 7 great as an example. It switches between apps faster than Android phones at double the processing power. Apple can sell a lot of phones at this price point and there will still be plenty to lust after in the iPhone 5.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
This is stupid. Last year's iPhone for $200 is still $200 more than last year's Android phone.
This news doesn't really change the value equation much at all and it's difficult to see how it will have any impact.
There is a $0 unsubsidized Android phone?
Leaving aside the fact that the price may be close to what it's truly worth, where can I get one?
I think it's possible.
In MP3 player market, Apple makes big, medium and small iPods. Although it started with the big, Apple put out medium, then small iPods eventually. As we all know, this strategy worked beautifully.
I think it makes sense that Apple makes medium iPhone at some point, and, even small iPhone eventually. It's just a matter of time. Apple will need to calculate its moves carefully. I think Cook can handle it. I think this strategy can work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970
I suspect it is more likely for Apple to design a new phone, perhaps based on one of the previous phones as a base platform but working to squeeze every dollar they can out of it while also, perhaps, trying to add some new value.
Apple is working on a lower cost phone option. It's really a matter of when and how, not if.
Yep. Anyone who thinks Apple needs to make trashy, throw--away phones to compete with the trashy throw-away Android phones has completely misunderstood who Apple is and what value they bring to the equation.
I would buy a $600 iPhone and use voice and Wifi and a small data plan, if a carrier would offer it. I don't need lots of cellular data (simple map data, voicemail) and I do 95% of my browsing on WiFi.
The carriers are simply not interested in that market. Instead they are trying to move everyone to an expensive data plan and give away voice/sms.
I just need good coverage from a decent provider.
If the rumors about the larger-screened iPhone 5 (or whatever we call it) are true, it may be that Apple is waiting for this as a way to differentiate the high-end iPhone.
Then I could see them re-designing and consolidating iPhone 4S, 4 and 3GS into one or two second tier, lower priced phones, all physically sharing many of the same parts (e.g., screens, batteries, CPUs, etc.) in order to get to the economies of scale on parts to help drive down their costs on those products.
So you could end up with something like:
iPhone 5 (high-end, larger screen, etc.)
iPhone 4x (mid price)
iPhone 3x (lowest price)
Where 4x and 3x are versions of the 4S/4 and 3GS redesigned for better consistency and economy of scale on components (plus leveraging everything they've learned since the original to make them less expensive.)
Originally Posted by cwoloszynski
I would buy a $600 iPhone and use voice and Wifi and a small data plan, if a carrier would offer it.
Straight Talk! It's what we're doing. Unlocked 6th gen iPhones on day one* and leaving Verizon forever.
*Well, as soon as I learn how exactly to get them running on Straight Talk. It's a lot of money to drop on something I'm not certain will work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970
I suspect it is more likely for Apple to design a new phone, perhaps based on one of the previous phones as a base platform but working to squeeze every dollar they can out of it while also, perhaps, trying to add some new value.
Apple is working on a lower cost phone option. It's really a matter of when and how, not if.
I agree, but I believe mr. "analyst" was talking about lower prices on last year's phones.
Since the new lineup after October is going to be:
- iPad, iPad mini
- iPod, iPod nano
- iPhone, ?
I think that despite the regular ridiculing it gets on this forum, that they might be trying to produce something like an "iPhone nano" in the near future. It's pretty clear from the market stats and sales of Android handsets that the 4s is already much more phone than the average person needs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Ugh, I hope this isn't more "iPhone 4 gets dropped, iPhone 3GS sticks around" nonsense.
Apple indicated a few months ago that it would be using the 3GS as an inexpensive (notice I didn't say cheap
EDIT: That article could have originated with Peter Misek rather than Apple, making it just a tad less reliable than I thought.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
I agree, but I believe mr. "analyst" was talking about lower prices on last year's phones.
Since the new lineup after October is going to be:
- iPad, iPad mini
- iPod, iPod nano
- iPhone, ?
I think that despite the regular ridiculing it gets on this forum, that they might be trying to produce something like an "iPhone nano" in the near future. It's pretty clear from the market stats and sales of Android handsets that the 4s is already much more phone than the average person needs.
Wondering if Apple would pull an iPod nano on the phone in the sense that they did with the latest iPod nano...that is...smaller, simpler touch screen (but no real iOS like the iPod touch)...greatly stripped down and simplified functionality with the veneer of being an iPhone. It's an approach anyway. Shoot even without going full-on smart phone Apple could bring a lot to the shitty usability of so-called "dumb" phones. That might be the first step to take. I don't know whether it's economically feasible. But maybe it is basically a "smarter than dumb but dumber than smart" phone. Address book, calendar, music, iMessages...no apps. Like that.
All of that said, Apple's clearly trying to establish an iOS hegmony and that type of phone would not help (short term or directly). Still it might pull millions of people into the Apple ecosystem and get them on the track to iOS devices in the future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Apple indicated a few months ago that it would be using the 3GS as an inexpensive (notice I didn't say cheap
+1 this.
Although I think the iPhone 4 would be the phone... I can't see the 3GS being kept supported under iOS beyond iOS 6.2 (if not 6.1). That's a lot of code forks to maintain, if the iPad Air/Mini/Small/Nano/Little comes to fruition. And you can't sell what you don't support.
You need to lower it in the US to avoid a back selling grey market (buy in india for ~$200-300, sell in US for < 375), lower the price to $200 here. Driving to an iPhone 4 also drives Facetime as a critical minimum feature (the question will be if Siri ever gets 'allowed' on the 4). And with Retina Display.
It's the emerging markets that Apple needs to lower the pricing umbrella, and Europe where pre-paids are the norm.
A massive reduction in some market shares means reduced prices are a certainty. So it is not if, but when.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
A company selling something at or below cost to gain market share? Apple or Amazon?
Apple won't do that.
To the extent that Amazon does it (e.g., with the Kindle) it's because they view their business model a bit differently. They're giving away the razors (Kindle devices) to sell the blades (books and other Kindle content).
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970
Wondering if Apple would pull an iPod nano on the phone in the sense that they did with the latest iPod nano...that is...smaller, simpler touch screen (but no real iOS like the iPod touch)...greatly stripped down and simplified functionality with the veneer of being an iPhone. It's an approach anyway. Shoot even without going full-on smart phone Apple could bring a lot to the shitty usability of so-called "dumb" phones. That might be the first step to take. I don't know whether it's economically feasible. But maybe it is basically a "smarter than dumb but dumber than smart" phone. Address book, calendar, music, iMessages...no apps. Like that.
All of that said, Apple's clearly trying to establish an iOS hegmony and that type of phone would not help (short term or directly). Still it might pull millions of people into the Apple ecosystem and get them on the track to iOS devices in the future.
I do not think you will see any iPhone product 'forks' with a subset of the current OS. The iPod series save for the Touch is not iOS. iOS is about driving capabilities to mobile apps. A 'nano' phone would cause both OS and Apps to 'fork' their code, and mix their message.
Apple will not create a iOS 'consumer' 'pro' and 'enterprise' version of the phone in a forward motion (ala Microsoft). It's about increasing capability for same $$, not cutting existing capabilities to hit a new price point.
If anything, this is where Tim Cook just goes to the supply chain and tells them to cut their prices by 50% and increase shipments by 100% ['revenue neutral' to the supplier], because he knows how to do that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
A company selling something at or below cost to gain market share? Apple or Amazon?
Apple will make a profit... if they cut prices.. they cut costs by a proportional amount.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff
I do not think you will see any iPhone product 'forks' with a subset of the current OS. The iPod series save for the Touch is not iOS. iOS is about driving capabilities to mobile apps. A 'nano' phone would cause both OS and Apps to 'fork' their code, and mix their message.
Apple will not create a iOS 'consumer' 'pro' and 'enterprise' version of the phone in a forward motion (ala Microsoft). It's about increasing capability for same $$, not cutting existing capabilities to hit a new price point.
But that's the thing...I wouldn't characterize it as any kind of iOS fork. iPod nano is not iOS in any way. It has the veneer of iOS-ness, that's it. They did this to bring iOS mojo to iPod nano without actually cramming iOS into that device. I'm suggesting the same possibility for an possible iPhone nano.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff
If anything, this is where Tim Cook just goes to the supply chain and tells them to cut their prices by 50% and increase shipments by 100% ['revenue neutral' to the supplier], because he knows how to do that.
If only it were that simple and easy. Sadly* these other companies also think about profits, not just revenue. Were it as easy as you suggest, it would have been done.
*Sadly for your theory, but happily because unprofitable companies have a nasty habit of going away fairly quickly.