A cheaper iPhone isn't Apple's only problem. The iOS user interface is getting rather long in the tooth, they need to fix that. Having more than one screen size is also a necessity. Plus, they need to stop selling the older versions. An iPhone 5 with a 4" screen for the low end, and one with AT LEAST a 5" screen on the high end.
They might even want to consider adding full phone capabilities to the iPad Mini with the idea that people would be using a bluetooth headset for phone calls.
A cheaper iPhone isn't Apple's only problem. The iOS user interface is getting rather long in the tooth, they need to fix that. Having more than one screen size is also a necessity. Plus, they need to stop selling the older versions. An iPhone 5 with a 4" screen for the low end, and one with AT LEAST a 5" screen on the high end.
They might even want to consider adding full phone capabilities to the iPad Mini with the idea that people would be using a bluetooth headset for phone calls.
-kpluck
You have completely killed off their $450 to $650 customers and have marketed the $650 to $850 iPhone 5 as being a low-end device. None of that sounds reasonable to me.
As for iOS "being long in the tooth" what exactly is wrong with it? Do you simply want something different each revision for the sake of it being different? I certainly don't. I want something that is more usable with each revision. Why can't we say that Apple got it right with version 1.0 that they haven't had to scrap it and start the OS from scratch few years? Windows Mobile in all its iterations is not how I want my mobile OS evolve. And remember the transition between Mac OS 9 and Mac OS X? I don't want all hassle again. I was happy they finally made the chance because they were at a technical dead end but it still took years for Mac OS X to get well polished. No OS should give all that up simply because some think it's boring because they got it right form the very start.
PS: There is an open source BeOS project which I also don't understand. Why not work on making something useful if you are going to work on an OS?
I don't agree with making a larger cheaper phone. Apple's appeal is tha it makes top quality high end products. If it makes a cheaper lower quality product it could affect that imagine long term.
Well Forbs says Apple needs to get out of the smartphone business and focus on TV, smarthomes, smartcars and wearable devices. What's really funny is they claim Apple needs to do this because the smartphone market is saturated, yet in the same breath talk about a resurgence from RIM. Er, if the smartphone market is saturated how the hell does RIM make a comeback?
So will Apple finally succumb to the "good enough" business model? Will Apple join the "race to the bottom" economic hellhole? Analysts certainly want it to it would appear. How will it be special to own an Apple product if that happens?
All I know is if they do they can no longer count on the traditional loyalty of Apple users. If my Apple product is just another then why even care anymore?
Apple is a business, I know that. They have to make money and profits to satisfy shareholders, I know that. But they WERE something special.
So will Apple finally succumb to the "good enough" business model? Will Apple join the "race to the bottom" economic hellhole? Analysts certainly want it to it would appear. How will it be special to own an Apple product if that happens?
All I know is if they do they can no longer count on the traditional loyalty of Apple users. If my Apple product is just another <insert product category> then why even care anymore?
Apple is a business, I know that. They have to make money and profits to satisfy shareholders, I know that. But they WERE something special.
Oh stop, much too early to break into hysterics. You should know if they make a less-expensive phone it'll be the best low-end phone anybody ever saw. Chin up! Have faith!
That's just BULL! First of all, Apple already has a cheap strategy, it's called previous versions of iPhone. Those can be had for free with contract. Why the hell would they go specifically create a separate line? Not only that, they only create the best product they know how to create. Just like the netbook argument, they don't know how to create a $500 laptop that doesn't suck so they never did. Instead, they created the Air which set the standard.
If they already have a great low cost iPhone why would they create another??? Duh?
When Apple made the iPad mini they didn't go the cheap route. Yes it's cheaper than the full size iPad but its not a cheap product. If Apple starts going the cheap route then we know Tim Cook has jumped the shark. :no:
And the Lord did grin, and the people did feast upon the lambs and sloths and carp and anchovies and orangutans and breakfast cereals and fruit bats...
That's just BULL! First of all, Apple already has a cheap strategy, it's called previous versions of iPhone. Those can be had for free with contract. Why the hell would they go specifically create a separate line? ...
It's only "free" in the US and other places that subsidize phones. Most of the world doesn't have subsidized phones, and many third world countries cannot afford an unsubsidized iPhone price.
Some non-contract Android phones sell for under $125, with more memory, GPS, 3G and faster CPU than the original iPhone. That's about 1/4 the price of Apple's least expensive iPhone 4 model, and is why some analysts want Apple to come out with a much lower price model in order to grab more of the world's markets.
--
Another reason why some analysts want a less expensive model, is that some US and non-US carriers have already stopped giving subsidies, and the fear is that all of them might. In that case, they think Apple could be in trouble. Remember, the iPhone didn't really take off in the US until it the 2008 subsidy gave a low $200 upfront cost.
If there's no subsidy, its higher price becomes apparent again. Apple's profit margins could take a huge hit if its prices have to drop to match the competition. If the price stays high, the sales will take a hit just like in the rest of the world.
(Note that I am not personally arguing about either topic. I'm just explaining what their thinking is.)
It's only "free" in the US and other places that subsidize phones. Most of the world doesn't have subsidized phones, and many third world countries cannot afford an unsubsidized iPhone price.
Some non-contract Android phones sell for under $125, with more memory, GPS, 3G and faster CPU than the original iPhone. That's about 1/4 the price of Apple's least expensive iPhone 4 model, and is why some analysts want Apple to come out with a much lower price model in order to grab more of the world's markets.
--
Another reason why some analysts want a less expensive model, is that some US and non-US carriers have already stopped giving subsidies, and the fear is that all of them might. In that case, they think Apple could be in trouble. Remember, the iPhone didn't really take off in the US until it the 2008 subsidy gave a low $200 upfront cost.
If there's no subsidy, its higher price becomes apparent again. Apple's profit margins could take a huge hit if its prices have to drop to match the competition. If the price stays high, the sales will take a hit just like in the rest of the world.
(Note that I am not personally arguing about either topic. I'm just explaining what their thinking is.)
Not to sound mean or insensitive, but why would Apple care about market share in third world countries. I hear this argument repeatedly and it does not make any sense to me.
It's only "free" in the US and other places that subsidize phones. Most of the world doesn't have subsidized phones, and many third world countries cannot afford an unsubsidized iPhone price.
Some non-contract Android phones sell for under $125, with more memory, GPS, 3G and faster CPU than the original iPhone. That's about 1/4 the price of Apple's least expensive iPhone 4 model, and is why some analysts want Apple to come out with a much lower price model in order to grab more of the world's markets.
--
Another reason why some analysts want a less expensive model, is that some US and non-US carriers have already stopped giving subsidies, and the fear is that all of them might. In that case, they think Apple could be in trouble. Remember, the iPhone didn't really take off in the US until it the 2008 subsidy gave a low $200 upfront cost.
If there's no subsidy, its higher price becomes apparent again. Apple's profit margins could take a huge hit if its prices have to drop to match the competition. If the price stays high, the sales will take a hit just like in the rest of the world.
(Note that I am not personally arguing about either topic. I'm just explaining what their thinking is.)
The thing that you are not taking into account is that Android phones like the S3 cost almost as much as the iPhone, therefor I don't think this is such a big deal.
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.
It's funny that the Asian markets supposedly like the iPad mini because of the smaller size (compared to the iPad) but they also like the Note because it's larger than the iPhone.
Comments
A cheaper iPhone isn't Apple's only problem. The iOS user interface is getting rather long in the tooth, they need to fix that. Having more than one screen size is also a necessity. Plus, they need to stop selling the older versions. An iPhone 5 with a 4" screen for the low end, and one with AT LEAST a 5" screen on the high end.
They might even want to consider adding full phone capabilities to the iPad Mini with the idea that people would be using a bluetooth headset for phone calls.
-kpluck
You have completely killed off their $450 to $650 customers and have marketed the $650 to $850 iPhone 5 as being a low-end device. None of that sounds reasonable to me.
As for iOS "being long in the tooth" what exactly is wrong with it? Do you simply want something different each revision for the sake of it being different? I certainly don't. I want something that is more usable with each revision. Why can't we say that Apple got it right with version 1.0 that they haven't had to scrap it and start the OS from scratch few years? Windows Mobile in all its iterations is not how I want my mobile OS evolve. And remember the transition between Mac OS 9 and Mac OS X? I don't want all hassle again. I was happy they finally made the chance because they were at a technical dead end but it still took years for Mac OS X to get well polished. No OS should give all that up simply because some think it's boring because they got it right form the very start.
PS: There is an open source BeOS project which I also don't understand. Why not work on making something useful if you are going to work on an OS?
http://www.macworld.com/article/2023976/macalope-peak-crazy.html
Originally Posted by pluck
…one with AT LEAST a 5" screen on the high end.
How is this a phone?!
All I know is if they do they can no longer count on the traditional loyalty of Apple users. If my Apple product is just another then why even care anymore?
Apple is a business, I know that. They have to make money and profits to satisfy shareholders, I know that. But they WERE something special.
Oh stop, much too early to break into hysterics. You should know if they make a less-expensive phone it'll be the best low-end phone anybody ever saw. Chin up! Have faith!
Were equates to when?
If they already have a great low cost iPhone why would they create another??? Duh?
Originally Posted by JCC
First of all, Apple already has a cheap strategy, it's called previous versions of iPhone. Those can be had for free with contract.
"People" demand an iPhone that is $200 off-contract. Don't ask why they demand it or who they are, but they do.
Why the hell would they go specifically create a separate line? If they already have a great low cost iPhone why would they create another??? Duh?
Steve's dead.
Originally Posted by Rogifan
If Apple starts going the cheap route then we know Tim Cook has jumped the shark.
Bingo.
What defines cheap? Is there a single definition?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
Have faith!
And the Lord did grin, and the people did feast upon the lambs and sloths and carp and anchovies and orangutans and breakfast cereals and fruit bats...
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCC
That's just BULL! First of all, Apple already has a cheap strategy, it's called previous versions of iPhone. Those can be had for free with contract. Why the hell would they go specifically create a separate line? ...
It's only "free" in the US and other places that subsidize phones. Most of the world doesn't have subsidized phones, and many third world countries cannot afford an unsubsidized iPhone price.
Some non-contract Android phones sell for under $125, with more memory, GPS, 3G and faster CPU than the original iPhone. That's about 1/4 the price of Apple's least expensive iPhone 4 model, and is why some analysts want Apple to come out with a much lower price model in order to grab more of the world's markets.
--
Another reason why some analysts want a less expensive model, is that some US and non-US carriers have already stopped giving subsidies, and the fear is that all of them might. In that case, they think Apple could be in trouble. Remember, the iPhone didn't really take off in the US until it the 2008 subsidy gave a low $200 upfront cost.
If there's no subsidy, its higher price becomes apparent again. Apple's profit margins could take a huge hit if its prices have to drop to match the competition. If the price stays high, the sales will take a hit just like in the rest of the world.
(Note that I am not personally arguing about either topic. I'm just explaining what their thinking is.)
Maybe they're using the same crappy, low-budget screens that are so common in Android-ville. /s
Not that I believe the rumor for a second, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
It's only "free" in the US and other places that subsidize phones. Most of the world doesn't have subsidized phones, and many third world countries cannot afford an unsubsidized iPhone price.
Some non-contract Android phones sell for under $125, with more memory, GPS, 3G and faster CPU than the original iPhone. That's about 1/4 the price of Apple's least expensive iPhone 4 model, and is why some analysts want Apple to come out with a much lower price model in order to grab more of the world's markets.
--
Another reason why some analysts want a less expensive model, is that some US and non-US carriers have already stopped giving subsidies, and the fear is that all of them might. In that case, they think Apple could be in trouble. Remember, the iPhone didn't really take off in the US until it the 2008 subsidy gave a low $200 upfront cost.
If there's no subsidy, its higher price becomes apparent again. Apple's profit margins could take a huge hit if its prices have to drop to match the competition. If the price stays high, the sales will take a hit just like in the rest of the world.
(Note that I am not personally arguing about either topic. I'm just explaining what their thinking is.)
Not to sound mean or insensitive, but why would Apple care about market share in third world countries. I hear this argument repeatedly and it does not make any sense to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
It's only "free" in the US and other places that subsidize phones. Most of the world doesn't have subsidized phones, and many third world countries cannot afford an unsubsidized iPhone price.
Some non-contract Android phones sell for under $125, with more memory, GPS, 3G and faster CPU than the original iPhone. That's about 1/4 the price of Apple's least expensive iPhone 4 model, and is why some analysts want Apple to come out with a much lower price model in order to grab more of the world's markets.
--
Another reason why some analysts want a less expensive model, is that some US and non-US carriers have already stopped giving subsidies, and the fear is that all of them might. In that case, they think Apple could be in trouble. Remember, the iPhone didn't really take off in the US until it the 2008 subsidy gave a low $200 upfront cost.
If there's no subsidy, its higher price becomes apparent again. Apple's profit margins could take a huge hit if its prices have to drop to match the competition. If the price stays high, the sales will take a hit just like in the rest of the world.
(Note that I am not personally arguing about either topic. I'm just explaining what their thinking is.)
The thing that you are not taking into account is that Android phones like the S3 cost almost as much as the iPhone, therefor I don't think this is such a big deal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
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.
It's funny that the Asian markets supposedly like the iPad mini because of the smaller size (compared to the iPad) but they also like the Note because it's larger than the iPhone.