Tim Cook often talks about no leaving any price umbrellas, so a cheap iPhone will come but only when the existing market is saturated.
As to what it will be, my guess is the iPod touch could add a voice and data (3G) chip, but no GPS chip, no LTE, no NFC if the higher end iPhone ever has that, and as now possibly no speakers, nevertheless you've got a basic smartphone phone. Better than most Android devices. ( Note: you can still get location via triangulation or wifi). The battery life will be impacted on 3G, but will have the same life on all other configurations. What we're waiting for is, maybe, slightly better batteries.
Pretty sure that is what the nano sim is about, long term. Sold off contract, and in stores and outside carrier shops they will sell like hot cakes. Apple will increase their market in the meantime by getting on other carriers. And it will have some other product - some high end - product in the mix to keep margins up overall.
Lower cost that what? Than free? iPhone 4 is free and easily as good as other 'free' phones. In EMEA and other countries where there is actual network competition, even the 4S or 5 can be had for 'free' with certain contracts.
Another man who doesn't understand contract pricing, despite it being in the article.
Tim Cook often talks about no leaving any price umbrellas, so a cheap iPhone will come but only when the existing market is saturated.
As to what it will be, my guess is the iPod touch could add a 3G chip, but no GPS chip, no LTE, no NFC if the higher end iPhone ever has that, and as now possibly no speakers, nevertheless you've got a basic smartphone phone. Better than most Android devices. ( Note: you can still get location via triangulation or wifi). The battery life will be impacted on 3G, but will have the same life on all other configurations. What we're waiting for is, maybe, slightly better batteries.
Pretty sure that is what the nano sim is about, long term. Sold off contract, and in stores and outside carrier shops they will sell like hot cakes. Apple will increase their market in the meantime by getting on other carriers. And it will have some other product - some high end - product in the mix to keep margins up overall.
In as little as 3 years LTE in the iPod Touch with carrier VoIP on LTE could be feasible and very cost effective.
Apple needs to do what it is best at, making quality products, not making cheap products. There is definitely a race to the bottom taking place amongst many manufacturers, and Apple doesn't need to stoop to that level.
Apple doesn't need the Android crowd, the bum crowd and the third world crowd, as those customers don't have any money, and it would be a bad business decision.
It's only been five years since the first iPhone launched. Apple is still a relatively new player in the smartphone market, the high end of the cell phone range. They've done extremely well so far but there is still plenty of market share (and plenty of profits) to be had at the high end. No need for them to enter the low end (the less profitable end) of the handset market yet.
IMO - while perhaps not an iphone nano(im not sure what it brings to the party except it will be sleek, elegent, well built etc), but yes different sizes... I for one like the 3.5 size. Make the 4S LTE and perhaps same thinkness (with no glass back) with a bigger battery and Id be a happy camper. While many poo-poo it here, there is also a definite market for 4.5 size phone... thumbs and 'retina' be damned, d'oh!
personally I do too. I don't care for the iPhone 5. It's just a little too big. I wasn't sure how I'd feel about the original iPhone either, as I was using the Razr flip phone at the time. But I discovered it made up for in thinness what it lacked in length, and the fact it worked seamlessly wi my Mac won me over completely. Portability in a phone is the most important aspect of any mobile phone, "smart" or otherwise. So making a phone bigger seems counter-intuitive, no matter how well designed. Some of the Android models are just ridiculous.
There was a time before the iPhone when I needed a smartphone, so I had the first Sprint Palm Samsung SPH i300. But it was too big to carry to clubs, and the beach, etc. and far too expensive should anything have happened to it. So I also got the Motorola Razr, which slipped right into my pants pocket. The company paid for the Samsung, so yes it was a luxury, but an affordable one, and made having a cell phone on me at all times not such a burden. But despite Palm's Apple-like software, it was clumsy poorly implemented, offered no updates. It did however do one very important thing flawlessly ... It kept my contacts in sync.
So, drawing from that experience, should Apple move exclusively toward the taller form factor of the iPhone 5 and eliminate the 4 series form factor altogether, I will reluctantly buy it as I have chosen to become dependent on the Apple ecosystem, however, I would eagerly welcome a smaller form factor, even if it was not a true smartphone, but something the easily integrated within the Apple ecosystem and offered as little as contacts and calander synchronization, photos, e-mail, and maybe maps and iTunes. This would of course be an entry level phone that would expose customers to the Apple ecosystem in a positive way and make them want more. And I don't think this is unreasonable, since they already do it with the Mac. arguably the iPad is an entry level computer to an iMac or MacBook, but certainly the 11" MacBook Air is. It lacks many of the features of the "pro" series and desktop models, yet Apple still offers it despite it being an "incomplete" experience. There's no reason the same model can't apply to phones. Mainly in that Apple offers computer users a choice, recognizing that Mac users needs are actually different. Leveraging the iPhone technology, I think Apple could produce a highly desirable limited function iPhone to compete effectively against the cheap flip phones, and bar phones, that would ultimately draw users into the Apple ecosystem. But more importantly to offer consumers a choice over a relatively large 4" iPhone and something ore compact that provides essential phone functions, without necessarily offering the full Internet. That's essentially what the pre-paid phone market offers now. And who knows, as Siri becomes less of a major new technology, perhaps Internet queries on a smaller phone could be audio only in much the same way the Shuffle and Nano offer spoken ID.
It's easy to argue that Apple could turn a decent profit on a low product but you need to consider the man hours, the manufacturing, and the component sourcing, to name a few, that could affect other parts of their more profitable business. If it takes about the same time for a Foxconn assembly line to manufacturer a 3GS as it is to manufacture a 5 then does it do Apple any favours if it needs 10x as many for a greater world audience at a fraction of the iPhone 5 price and that production will have to replace iPhone 5 production which is already too low to meet current demand.
You should also consider brand dilution. Reaching a larger market with a cheaper product doesn't always work out favourably if your "quality" branding becomes synonymous with cheap.
There you go being your usual bitter, hostile, arrogant, deviant self. No matter what the argument you always have to be right¿
Well DUH! We already have an inexpensive iPhone. Its called the iPhone 4 and its free. The iPhone 4s is 99 dollars and it would be considered the less inexpensive iPhone as well.
Comments
As to what it will be, my guess is the iPod touch could add a voice and data (3G) chip, but no GPS chip, no LTE, no NFC if the higher end iPhone ever has that, and as now possibly no speakers, nevertheless you've got a basic smartphone phone. Better than most Android devices. ( Note: you can still get location via triangulation or wifi). The battery life will be impacted on 3G, but will have the same life on all other configurations. What we're waiting for is, maybe, slightly better batteries.
Pretty sure that is what the nano sim is about, long term. Sold off contract, and in stores and outside carrier shops they will sell like hot cakes. Apple will increase their market in the meantime by getting on other carriers. And it will have some other product - some high end - product in the mix to keep margins up overall.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook
Lower cost that what? Than free? iPhone 4 is free and easily as good as other 'free' phones. In EMEA and other countries where there is actual network competition, even the 4S or 5 can be had for 'free' with certain contracts.
Another man who doesn't understand contract pricing, despite it being in the article.
In as little as 3 years LTE in the iPod Touch with carrier VoIP on LTE could be feasible and very cost effective.
Good for Apple!
Apple needs to do what it is best at, making quality products, not making cheap products. There is definitely a race to the bottom taking place amongst many manufacturers, and Apple doesn't need to stoop to that level.
Apple doesn't need the Android crowd, the bum crowd and the third world crowd, as those customers don't have any money, and it would be a bad business decision.
There was a time before the iPhone when I needed a smartphone, so I had the first Sprint Palm Samsung SPH i300. But it was too big to carry to clubs, and the beach, etc. and far too expensive should anything have happened to it. So I also got the Motorola Razr, which slipped right into my pants pocket. The company paid for the Samsung, so yes it was a luxury, but an affordable one, and made having a cell phone on me at all times not such a burden. But despite Palm's Apple-like software, it was clumsy poorly implemented, offered no updates. It did however do one very important thing flawlessly ... It kept my contacts in sync.
So, drawing from that experience, should Apple move exclusively toward the taller form factor of the iPhone 5 and eliminate the 4 series form factor altogether, I will reluctantly buy it as I have chosen to become dependent on the Apple ecosystem, however, I would eagerly welcome a smaller form factor, even if it was not a true smartphone, but something the easily integrated within the Apple ecosystem and offered as little as contacts and calander synchronization, photos, e-mail, and maybe maps and iTunes. This would of course be an entry level phone that would expose customers to the Apple ecosystem in a positive way and make them want more. And I don't think this is unreasonable, since they already do it with the Mac. arguably the iPad is an entry level computer to an iMac or MacBook, but certainly the 11" MacBook Air is. It lacks many of the features of the "pro" series and desktop models, yet Apple still offers it despite it being an "incomplete" experience. There's no reason the same model can't apply to phones. Mainly in that Apple offers computer users a choice, recognizing that Mac users needs are actually different. Leveraging the iPhone technology, I think Apple could produce a highly desirable limited function iPhone to compete effectively against the cheap flip phones, and bar phones, that would ultimately draw users into the Apple ecosystem. But more importantly to offer consumers a choice over a relatively large 4" iPhone and something ore compact that provides essential phone functions, without necessarily offering the full Internet. That's essentially what the pre-paid phone market offers now. And who knows, as Siri becomes less of a major new technology, perhaps Internet queries on a smaller phone could be audio only in much the same way the Shuffle and Nano offer spoken ID.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
It's easy to argue that Apple could turn a decent profit on a low product but you need to consider the man hours, the manufacturing, and the component sourcing, to name a few, that could affect other parts of their more profitable business. If it takes about the same time for a Foxconn assembly line to manufacturer a 3GS as it is to manufacture a 5 then does it do Apple any favours if it needs 10x as many for a greater world audience at a fraction of the iPhone 5 price and that production will have to replace iPhone 5 production which is already too low to meet current demand.
You should also consider brand dilution. Reaching a larger market with a cheaper product doesn't always work out favourably if your "quality" branding becomes synonymous with cheap.
There you go being your usual bitter, hostile, arrogant, deviant self. No matter what the argument you always have to be right¿
Apple can do no wrong in your eyes¿
Well DUH! We already have an inexpensive iPhone. Its called the iPhone 4 and its free. The iPhone 4s is 99 dollars and it would be considered the less inexpensive iPhone as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSheldon
Apple doesn't do inexpensive- look what it charges for its cables alone.
You're right, it tends to weed out those who are unworthy of owning Apple products......in other words, those who buy on price, not value.