WSJ: Apple to build cheaper iPhone as smartphone dominance slips

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
In a tweet on Tuesday, The Wall Street Journal claimed Apple is currently working on a cheaper iPhone that could hit the market as soon as this year.

iPhone 5


Coming just hours after DigiTimes said Apple would be releasing a less expensive iPhone with a larger 5-inch screen, The Journal tweeted an identical message seemingly corroborating the earlier report.

According to people briefed on the matter, Apple is reportedly looking to a new audience with the less expensive iPhone, a move the WSJ claims is in response to slipping smartphone supremacy.

While Apple has supposedly tossed around the idea of building a more affordable iPhone "for years," the plan is progressing toward a release in the second half of 2013.

The new device could be unveiled later this year and be marketed as an entry-level model to Apple's flagship iPhone. Sources say the cheaper unit may take on the form factor and design of the current iPhone with a chassis made from less exotic materials like polycarbonate. Other parts could "remain the same or be recycled from older iPhone models."

«134567

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 125
    I can't wait to re-read the intelligent posts made earlier today about this same subject.
  • Reply 2 of 125

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post



    In a tweet on Tuesday, The Wall Street Journal claimed Apple is currently working on a cheaper iPhone that could hit the market as soon as this year.

    Coming just hours after DigiTimes said Apple would be releasing a less expensive iPhone with a larger 5-inch screen, The Journal tweeted an identical message seemingly corroborating the earlier report.





    Developing


    Less expensive with bigger screen? No no no.


     


    My bet? (I'm the guy that was 80% right about the mini, against everyone. why? because I'm awesome)


     


    - Same price/ more expensive 5 inch iPhone, iPhoneX (as i said on other threads)


    - iPhone 5S, 100dollars cheaper.


     


    No low-end.

  • Reply 3 of 125
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Steve's dead; I buy it. The rumor, that is, not the "cheaper" product.


     


    "less-expensive", "5-inch screen". I don't even need humor websites anymore.

  • Reply 4 of 125
    monstrositymonstrosity Posts: 2,234member


    Stupid

  • Reply 5 of 125
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,586member
    Agreed. The screen is probably the most expensive component. So how could it be a larger screen AND a cheaper price? Makes no sense.

    And why would anyone even want a 5" screen. Apple's already made a big deal about how they purposely didn't increase the width of the screen so it still could be easily held.
  • Reply 6 of 125
    mazda 3smazda 3s Posts: 1,607member
    I don't understand this. We have the iPhone 5 as the current generation, and Apple sells the iPhone 4S and iPhone 4 if you want cheaper alternatives. It seems to work well.

    Why reinvent the wheel?
  • Reply 7 of 125
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

    And why would anyone even want a 5" screen. Apple's already made a big deal about how they purposely didn't increase the width of the screen so it still could be easily held.


     


    It won't be any wider, just taller. Eventually the iPhone will be the length of an old-style phone receiver. image

  • Reply 8 of 125
    allenbfallenbf Posts: 993member


    What are the chances that if true, this cheaper iPhone will never see the States or Europe?  Only sold in developing countries that need a cheaper iPhone?

  • Reply 9 of 125
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Steve's dead; I buy it. The rumor, that is, not the "cheaper" product.

    "less-expensive", "5-inch screen". I don't even need humor websites anymore.

    Is a 5" 264 PPI display less expensive than a 4" 326 PPI display or a 3.5" 326 PPI display? As unlikely it sounds there is a nugget of logic to it. I ran the numbers last week. At 5" you can use the same 1136x640 resolution of the iPhone 5 but with the panels of the iPad (4) to get a 5" display.

    Also think of the iPad mini with LTE. That is $469 for 16GB. That is about $200 less than the 16GB iPhone 5 sells for. There are more considerations for costs for a phone but I could see some ways to cut down on costs.

    Another consideration is where are the Galaxy Notes and other big ass phone and phablets being utilized? I'd heard it's in markets where they can't buy both so they are choosing a mix of the two.

    If that is true that might be a huge market and one that Apple needs to go after. If this market is China it might be an exclusive offering to China Mobile for a duration as part of their deal. It's the one carrier that would be able to leverage Apple.

    To be clear, I think it's very unlikely based on the information we have but it's certainly not impossible, and therefore the how, why, when and where of the possibility should be considered..
  • Reply 10 of 125
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    Guys it's simple. Apple is cutting service on the 3G and 3GS when the 5s comes out. The cheaper phone is the fire sale for unused parts. They are going to sell it full price only for $199 tax each.

    Bigger, plastic, cheaper. Done
  • Reply 11 of 125
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Originally Posted by allenbf View Post

    What are the chances that if true, this cheaper iPhone will never see the States or Europe?  Only sold in developing countries that need a cheaper iPhone?


     


    So zero apps built for it, then. Developers would go where the money is.


     



    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

    Is a 5" 264 PPI display less expensive than a 4" 326 PPI display or a 3.5" 326 PPI display? As unlikely it sounds there is a nugget of logic to it.


     


    See, yeah, you're right about that. But would they keep the resolution? Eventually it stops being retina.





    Another consideration is where are the Galaxy Notes and other big ass phone and phablets being utilized? I'd heard it's in markets where they can't buy both so they are choosing a mix of the two.


     


    In what markets couldn't both be purchased, and wouldn't it make more sense for Apple just to make both of their existing products available there? I can't imagine any situation in which designing, building, testing, and manufacturing an entirely different product is cheaper than paying off whoever needs paid off to get existing products sold somewhere.

  • Reply 12 of 125
    What Apple needs to do now is make a larger display for iPhone and increase the price .

    Not a cheap iPhone . iPhone is earning 2x more than shamesung . Why apple needs to dominate ? Apple is the king nobody comes close !!
  • Reply 13 of 125
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    So if it comes from the Wall Street journal that means its true? The media has been running with this meme for a long time now. Lets not forget they did the same thing with netbooks - everyone and their mother saying Apple had to create a budget laptop i.e netbook. Now it's Apple has to create a cheap smartphone. Same shit different day. Maybe Apple will do something but the chances of it being plastic are less than zero. I mean when they created the iPod mini and nano they weren't plastic were they?
  • Reply 14 of 125
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Originally Posted by raymondinperth View Post

    What Apple needs to do now is make a larger display for iPhone and increase the price .


     


    Why?

  • Reply 15 of 125
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    charlituna wrote: »
    Guys it's simple. Apple is cutting service on the 3G and 3GS when the 5s comes out. The cheaper phone is the fire sale for unused parts. They are going to sell it full price only for $199 tax each.
    Bigger, plastic, cheaper. Done
    If we get a big, cheap plastic phone Apple might be done. Why in the world would they ruin their brand in the pursuit of market share? They survived just fine not getting into a race to the bottom with PC's why start with smartphones?
  • Reply 16 of 125


    AAPL was boxed in by their own 'retina display' claim. Now they've a problem making larger display size because that'd make the display out of the 'retina' category. If they try to increase resolution, then that'd be yet another resolution for the developers to work on, more fragmentation.


     


    Tim and others need to really start thinking about the long term future. We cannot be be stuck with certain resolution screens and marketing claims which slows AAPL's innovation speed. I of course don't have a good solution to this, but just voicing my concern.

  • Reply 17 of 125

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    Is a 5" 264 PPI display less expensive than a 4" 326 PPI display or a 3.5" 326 PPI display? As unlikely it sounds there is a nugget of logic to it. I ran the numbers last week. At 5" you can use the same 1136x640 resolution of the iPhone 5 but with the panels of the iPad (4) to get a 5" display.

    Also think of the iPad mini with LTE. That is $469 for 16GB. That is about $200 less than the 16GB iPhone 5 sells for. There are more considerations for costs for a phone but I could see some ways to cut down on costs.

    Another consideration is where are the Galaxy Notes and other big ass phone and phablets being utilized? I'd heard it's in markets where they can't buy both so they are choosing a mix of the two.

    If that is true that might be a huge market and one that Apple needs to go after. If this market is China it might be an exclusive offering to China Mobile for a duration as part of their deal. It's the one carrier that would be able to leverage Apple.

    To be clear, I think it's very unlikely based on the information we have but it's certainly not impossible, and therefore the how, why, when and where of the possibility should be considered..


     


    I agree that it's unlikely, and I'm not liking the idea of embiggened iPhones.  However, your scenario is quite plausible.  I only looked at Galaxy Note 2, and it has 267 PPI.  264 PPI is right in line with the competition, Samsung, anyway.

  • Reply 18 of 125
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    See, yeah, you're right about that. But would they keep the resolution? Eventually it stops being retina.

    They kept the resolution for the iPad mini so it would be smooth for developers and users alike. They also used 7.85" because that allowed them to use iPhone /3G/3GS display pixel density which will scale to the iPhone 4/4S/5 pixel density making it 2048x1536 when the tech allows it.

    The iPhone 5 follows that same pattern by using the same pixel density panels and keeping the width the same to minimize impact on developers and users, and save on engineering and manufacturing costs. Would a 5" at 264 PPI display make the UI elements too large? I think that's possible but I'd have to see something concrete to make that judgement.

    Remember the 1x and 2x options on the iPad when running an iPhone app? Well the display size at 1x would be the exact same size as a 960x640 at 262 PPI display at a little under 5". If they would use the elongated 1136x640 iPhone 5 display it's pretty much exactly 5".
    In what markets couldn't both be purchased, and wouldn't it make more sense for Apple just to make both of their existing products available there? I can't imagine any situation in which designing, building, testing, and manufacturing an entirely different product is cheaper than paying off whoever needs paid off to get existing products sold somewhere.

    I don't know but I keep hearing about how the Asian markets love the size of the Galaxy Note and other such devices because they can have a decent tablet that is still easy to travel with and doubles as a phone.
  • Reply 19 of 125
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,653member


    Now people are reporting on tweets? That it "comes from the WSJ" doesn't lend any credibility. Unless they run an actual story, citing sources other than Digitimes, for all anyone knows, some intern at the WSJ read about the Digitimes story, had access to the twitter account, and, ... oh boy!

  • Reply 20 of 125
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    AAPL was boxed in by their own 'retina display' claim. Now they've a problem making larger display size because that'd make the display out of the 'retina' category. If they try to increase resolution, then that'd be yet another resolution for the developers to work on, more fragmentation.

    Tim and others need to really start thinking about the long term future. We cannot be be stuck with certain resolution screens and marketing claims which slows AAPL's innovation speed. I of course don't have a good solution to this, but just voicing my concern.

    What is there Retina claim? If you look at how they defined it you will see that it's based on someone with 20/20(6/6) vision, which isn't even close to being a majority. With a 264 PPI display you need to hold this 5" device 13" or more from your eyes in order for it be Retina, according to Apple's own definition.

    Here's the calculation: <FONT FACE= "Courier New">3438 * (1 ÷ 264 PPI ) = 13" </FONT FACE>

    How far would you keep a 5" device from your eyes? I think I average about 18" for my iPhone but I haven't exactly made a scientific study of it.
Sign In or Register to comment.