This is like saying - and it was an argument made here pre-mini - that the iPad mini wasn't needed because we had last years model.
No, it's not like that at all. The iPad mini isn't a bargain-basement priced iPad. It may be cheaper than a 9.7" iPad, but it's not aiming for the bottom of the market.
Quote:
Last years model has less of a cachet than this years cheaper model. I think Apple will have NFC, LTE and a possibly bigger form factor in the iPhone 6 and the iPhone "mini" can then look like the iPod touch with a cell radio. That will be light. Will it cannibalise? Yes, Apple isn't afraid to cannibalise itself.
It's not working. the older model just screams old. A new form factor - however cheap - is always going to be more fashionable.
The kind of cheap phone these people are calling for doesn't need any special cache. If anything, slap iPod Nano coloured front and back plates on an iPhone 4 and be done with it. I see plenty of people with iPhone 4's and 3GS's still, there's no social stigma from having these older models, and they don't seem to mind not having the latest and greatest.
BUT, I think Apple may also offer a LARGER iPhone around 4.8 inches. Lets face it, the some large screen Android phones are very popular BECAUSE of the large screens. After all, smart phones are primarily pocket computers. The majority of smart phone users spend much more time texting, surfing and using apps than they do making phone calls. A larger screen offers benefits and an opportunity for Apple to grow sales of the iPhone on the high end.
Yes. I have no idea why there are some Apple loyalists around these parts that hold so steadfast to a specific screen size and price point. Just because you or I don't necessarily want a 4.8" screen, that doesn't mean that a market will not exist in a year or two or three.
Whether we like it or not, mobile computing has opened society up to a desire for various screen sizes, LARGE or SMALL.
I just think it's ridiculous to place a 4.8"+ screen up to your ear...dorky. At least get a mini-blue tooth ear/talk piece for crying out loud! :-)
It's not working. the older model just screams old. A new form factor - however cheap - is always going to be more fashionable.
And let's cut the crap about profit share. Market share matters. If you don't hold up market share profits eventually collapse.
Sorry... I disagree.
Apple doesn't want to sell a "cheap, new" phone that might be fashionable. They would rather sell you the "best, new" iPhone for $650+
And more people buy it... estimates are that 89% of iPhone sales are the current model.
I also disagree about the market share thing. Apple has been "losing" the market share race against Android for about 2 years. Has there been a quarter where the iPhone lost Apple money?
But hey... that's why Apple cancelled the entire Mac line... since they could never beat Windows in market share.
Oh wait... that never happened. Apparently market share isn't their highest priority since their laptops start at $1000.
You don't believe the iPad is a satisfying replacement for a Mac?
Not yet.
Originally Posted by hmm
The telecoms subsidize quite a bit of the cost either way. The iphone 5 is $649 unlocked. I'm not sure exactly how much the carriers pay, but they're at least tying up several hundred dollars per customer. In some markets subsidies don't exist, so it's 100% on Apple and their retail partners.
Yep, let's just jump on something I wasn't talking about.
Originally Posted by shadash
Looks like other people have beat me to this, but you are not correct. Virgin's plans start at $30/month.
The plans are $30 a month regardless of the phone you get.
Originally Posted by asdasd
Once again an American who doesn't get subsidies…
Why do they matter, is all.
This is like saying - and it was an argument made here pre-mini - that the iPad mini wasn't needed because we had last years model. Last years model has less of a cachet than this years cheaper model.
The point being what? I still say that. Drop the iPad 2 to $299 and you don't need an iPad mini.
It worked for the iPhone. It worked spectacularly well for the iPhone.
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip
I also disagree about the market share thing. Apple has been "losing" the market share race against Android for about 2 years. Has there been a quarter where the iPhone lost Apple money?
You'll see cheap iPhones when you also see arboreal porcine.
Yep. It would dilute the brand image if they came out with a cheap phone. At least the 4 and 4s were the top dog in their day. To come out with a phone that is brand new and already outdated would take from the iPhone mystique and do more harm long term. That market is already being served by plenty of low cost/low performance phones that fill that need and if people want a lower priced iPhone, there is the the above mentioned 4 and 4s. Apple could lower their margins on those if they really want to get into that market, but their "premium" branding would take a hit. The iPad mini was a different form-factor so that does not apply here.
All throughout recent Apple history, people have claimed that Apple would "never do that". E.g. A Verizon iPhone. Continue to manufacture and sell old iPhone models. Make a 7" tablet. Make the screen any larger.
Or now, make a cheaper iPhone.
Apple progressively made cheaper iPod models, which helped keep the market to themselves.
Why would they not do the same with the iPhone? Heck, they wouldn't even have to sell it in the US, if they worried that it might cheapen the experience some feel. After all, it would have lesser specs to lower the price.
Given the disappointing sales of Apple products, it's obvious they've no choice but to release cheap products for the masses. From Mac to iThingies, how can they fail to have learned that you can't succeed without undercutting the competition's prices?
I think they should produce a budget phone for markets like India and China. This does not stop them selling the high-end phones too, but non-retina displays will be just as popular. Think a 3G level but with faster processor and possible slightly size larger too. After all, smaller is typically more expensive to engineer.
They can focus on revenue from the app store in those markets. They need to be there gaining back market share, otherwise they will continue to fall out of the world's biggest markets.
I don't see it happening. I don't see the need, people aren't asking for a smaller iPhone. Maybe a cheaper one but Apple isn't going to make one just for that. Maybe a new iPhone with a 4 inch screen, less powerful processor and colors.
Yep. It would dilute the brand image if they came out with a cheap phone. At least the 4 and 4s were the top dog in their day. To come out with a phone that is brand new and already outdated would take from the iPhone mystique and do more harm long term. That market is already being served by plenty of low cost/low performance phones that fill that need and if people want a lower priced iPhone, there is the the above mentioned 4 and 4s. Apple could lower their margins on those if they really want to get into that market, but their "premium" branding would take a hit. The iPad mini was a different form-factor so that does not apply here.
Is the iPad 2 diluting the image of Apple? They are very good to present new stuff in a good light. Just put it at the end of a presentation "and a new 8 Gb model, with A5 processor and in three colors". Teenagers would love it.
The black model would remain the top of the line. It's psychological, but this kind of thing works very well on markets. It would even reinforce the feeling people have with their top-line iPhones.
Is the iPad 2 diluting the image of Apple? They are very good to present new stuff in a good light. Just put it at the end of a presentation "and a new 8 Gb model, with A5 processor and in three colors". Teenagers would love it.
The black model would remain the top of the line. It's psychological, but this kind of thing works very well on markets. It would even reinforce the feeling people have with their top-line iPhones.
iPad 2 no issues alongside iPad 4. iPad mini... I think it could have been more polished.
I see an article that sits parallel to what I've said and a thread of regular people with zero verified data talking about things.
Anyone on a forum can say anything and mean anything by it. They can have zero information on the subject and say the same things as a real insider, or vice versa. That doesn't make their opinions worth anything ('anything' including, of course, consideration after the fact).
Articles by analysts have more worth than random forum comments simply because they're paid and because they have other humans reposting their words. However they have zero accountability and often zero credibility as a result thereof.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd
This is like saying - and it was an argument made here pre-mini - that the iPad mini wasn't needed because we had last years model.
No, it's not like that at all. The iPad mini isn't a bargain-basement priced iPad. It may be cheaper than a 9.7" iPad, but it's not aiming for the bottom of the market.
Quote:
Last years model has less of a cachet than this years cheaper model. I think Apple will have NFC, LTE and a possibly bigger form factor in the iPhone 6 and the iPhone "mini" can then look like the iPod touch with a cell radio. That will be light. Will it cannibalise? Yes, Apple isn't afraid to cannibalise itself.
It's not working. the older model just screams old. A new form factor - however cheap - is always going to be more fashionable.
The kind of cheap phone these people are calling for doesn't need any special cache. If anything, slap iPod Nano coloured front and back plates on an iPhone 4 and be done with it. I see plenty of people with iPhone 4's and 3GS's still, there's no social stigma from having these older models, and they don't seem to mind not having the latest and greatest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBHoule
BUT, I think Apple may also offer a LARGER iPhone around 4.8 inches. Lets face it, the some large screen Android phones are very popular BECAUSE of the large screens. After all, smart phones are primarily pocket computers. The majority of smart phone users spend much more time texting, surfing and using apps than they do making phone calls. A larger screen offers benefits and an opportunity for Apple to grow sales of the iPhone on the high end.
Yes. I have no idea why there are some Apple loyalists around these parts that hold so steadfast to a specific screen size and price point. Just because you or I don't necessarily want a 4.8" screen, that doesn't mean that a market will not exist in a year or two or three.
Whether we like it or not, mobile computing has opened society up to a desire for various screen sizes, LARGE or SMALL.
I just think it's ridiculous to place a 4.8"+ screen up to your ear...dorky. At least get a mini-blue tooth ear/talk piece for crying out loud! :-)
Sorry... I disagree.
Apple doesn't want to sell a "cheap, new" phone that might be fashionable. They would rather sell you the "best, new" iPhone for $650+
And more people buy it... estimates are that 89% of iPhone sales are the current model.
I also disagree about the market share thing. Apple has been "losing" the market share race against Android for about 2 years. Has there been a quarter where the iPhone lost Apple money?
But hey... that's why Apple cancelled the entire Mac line... since they could never beat Windows in market share.
Oh wait... that never happened. Apparently market share isn't their highest priority since their laptops start at $1000.
Originally Posted by MacRulez
You don't believe the iPad is a satisfying replacement for a Mac?
Not yet.
Originally Posted by hmm
The telecoms subsidize quite a bit of the cost either way. The iphone 5 is $649 unlocked. I'm not sure exactly how much the carriers pay, but they're at least tying up several hundred dollars per customer. In some markets subsidies don't exist, so it's 100% on Apple and their retail partners.
Yep, let's just jump on something I wasn't talking about.
Originally Posted by shadash
Looks like other people have beat me to this, but you are not correct. Virgin's plans start at $30/month.
The plans are $30 a month regardless of the phone you get.
Originally Posted by asdasd
Once again an American who doesn't get subsidies…
Why do they matter, is all.
This is like saying - and it was an argument made here pre-mini - that the iPad mini wasn't needed because we had last years model. Last years model has less of a cachet than this years cheaper model.
The point being what? I still say that. Drop the iPad 2 to $299 and you don't need an iPad mini.
It worked for the iPhone. It worked spectacularly well for the iPhone.
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip
I also disagree about the market share thing. Apple has been "losing" the market share race against Android for about 2 years. Has there been a quarter where the iPhone lost Apple money?
Those're two different things, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky
You'll see cheap iPhones when you also see arboreal porcine.
Yep. It would dilute the brand image if they came out with a cheap phone. At least the 4 and 4s were the top dog in their day. To come out with a phone that is brand new and already outdated would take from the iPhone mystique and do more harm long term. That market is already being served by plenty of low cost/low performance phones that fill that need and if people want a lower priced iPhone, there is the the above mentioned 4 and 4s. Apple could lower their margins on those if they really want to get into that market, but their "premium" branding would take a hit. The iPad mini was a different form-factor so that does not apply here.
Sadly Tim Cook might do this. Look at the iPad mini.
Hmm.
All throughout recent Apple history, people have claimed that Apple would "never do that". E.g. A Verizon iPhone. Continue to manufacture and sell old iPhone models. Make a 7" tablet. Make the screen any larger.
Or now, make a cheaper iPhone.
Apple progressively made cheaper iPod models, which helped keep the market to themselves.
Why would they not do the same with the iPhone? Heck, they wouldn't even have to sell it in the US, if they worried that it might cheapen the experience some feel. After all, it would have lesser specs to lower the price.
Originally Posted by KDarling
All throughout recent Apple history, people have claimed that Apple would "never do that". E.g. A Verizon iPhone.
No intelligent person ever claimed that.
Stop making things up. Just stop. It destroys any other non-made up point you may have had.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
No intelligent person ever claimed that.
Stop making things up. Just stop. It destroys any other non-made up point you may have had.
It's not made up, and I didn't say that an intelligent person ever claimed that. Just that many people did.
Do you never visit other forums?
Originally Posted by KDarling
…many…
[citation needed]
They can focus on revenue from the app store in those markets. They need to be there gaining back market share, otherwise they will continue to fall out of the world's biggest markets.
Originally Posted by realwarder
Think a 3G level but with faster processor and possible slightly size larger too.
So the 6th-gen iPhone in two years.
They need to be there gaining back market share,
They've only ever been gaining marketshare.
I don't see it happening. I don't see the need, people aren't asking for a smaller iPhone. Maybe a cheaper one but Apple isn't going to make one just for that. Maybe a new iPhone with a 4 inch screen, less powerful processor and colors.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSteelers
Yep. It would dilute the brand image if they came out with a cheap phone. At least the 4 and 4s were the top dog in their day. To come out with a phone that is brand new and already outdated would take from the iPhone mystique and do more harm long term. That market is already being served by plenty of low cost/low performance phones that fill that need and if people want a lower priced iPhone, there is the the above mentioned 4 and 4s. Apple could lower their margins on those if they really want to get into that market, but their "premium" branding would take a hit. The iPad mini was a different form-factor so that does not apply here.
Is the iPad 2 diluting the image of Apple? They are very good to present new stuff in a good light. Just put it at the end of a presentation "and a new 8 Gb model, with A5 processor and in three colors". Teenagers would love it.
The black model would remain the top of the line. It's psychological, but this kind of thing works very well on markets. It would even reinforce the feeling people have with their top-line iPhones.
iPad 2 no issues alongside iPad 4. iPad mini... I think it could have been more polished.
Tree pigs?
I don't get that. What falls short?
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
Hmm.
All throughout recent Apple history, people have claimed that Apple would "never do that". E.g. A Verizon iPhone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
No intelligent person ever claimed that.
Stop making things up. Just stop. It destroys any other non-made up point you may have had.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
It's not made up, and I didn't say that an intelligent person ever claimed that. Just that many people did.
Do you never visit other forums?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
[citation needed]
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/108197/verizon-iphone-seen-as-unlikely-from-apple-in-2010
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=302362
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/108197/verizon-iphone-seen-as-unlikely-from-apple-in-2010
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=302362
I see an article that sits parallel to what I've said and a thread of regular people with zero verified data talking about things.
Anyone on a forum can say anything and mean anything by it. They can have zero information on the subject and say the same things as a real insider, or vice versa. That doesn't make their opinions worth anything ('anything' including, of course, consideration after the fact).
Articles by analysts have more worth than random forum comments simply because they're paid and because they have other humans reposting their words. However they have zero accountability and often zero credibility as a result thereof.