For this to make sense, at least to me, the introduction of this cheaper iPhone should happen this summer, alongside the introduction of the iPhone 5S. And furthermore, the introduction will introduce a new iPhone strategy for Apple whereby as they bring out their new high end model each year they drop all older models of the iPhone completely and have the cheaper iPhone available alongside it.
So at any one time you've got the 1 latest and greatest in a few storage sizes, and one latest and cheapest in one small size. This would simplify the product lineup for people, in my mind. Do you want the 5S or the cheaper model? If you want the cheaper model, here you go, it's an 8GB phone made using clear plastic so you don't even need to choose a colour. If you want the 5S you can choose from black and white and 16-64 GB. Do you want to spend as little money on an iPhone as possible and yet still get a new iPhone? Or do you want the latest and greatest?
That's probably what we'll see.
As far as release dates Apple may spread them so that iPhone sales don't have the typical mid year drop off.
I could see the iPhone Mini launched in the spring/summer in time for back to school season and the main iPhone remains the fall/winter release in time for Christmas shopping.
Phil didn't say no, he didn't deny the rumors, he stated that Apple doesn't make cheap products. Cheap in this definition is not in price. The lowest priced Apple product at the moment is the iPod Shuffle, at $49. The iPod Touch is $199, and it closely resembels the iPhone in terms of usability, only difference is it doesn't have a cell radio.
The point is there is a market for a LOW COST phone, and if Apple can deliver a phone that can access the web, access facebook and twitter, and integrates with the Apple ecosystem, then the phone will be a winner. It's a stepping stone for an iPhone.
I remember when I got an iPod Touch because I couldn't afford an iPhone. I think some people in third world countries might feel the same, where maybe they can't afford an iPhone yet, but they can get the highest quality "budget" phone, the iPhone mini (or nano)
Curious if you think Apple would somehow limit the services and/or user features of a less expensive iPhone? If so, in what way? I can't imagine them purposely "throttling" the usability, but maybe you or someone else might see it differently. If not then it makes an up-sell to a premium iPhone somewhat difficult doesn't it, particularly if there's a 20% or more price difference to move up one notch. Maybe not offer the current iPhone at all in some markets to avoid that issue?
Apple obviously won't make a cheap phone, but I could see them making one that's still good quality and maintains their margins, while not being as expensive as the iPhone 5. God knows they'd sell enough to offset the design costs.
EDIT: And yeah the "see-through" part is BS. Assuming this story isn't completely made up, they probably just saw a prototype part...
1) Apple has lots of patents for innovative carbon fibre processes that are described in exactly this way (semi-transparent, weird layers, "glass onion" appearance).
2) On the other hand, speaking as someone who always had a transparent housing on every phone they owned before iPhone came along and took away the possibility ... only a small segment of society seems to want this. There are always transparent housings for almost any phone available, but most people don't seem to care for them or want them.
With so many rumors coming out, now I'm convinced Apple is deliberately planting these rumors to isolate who the leaks are in their supply and development process.
With so many rumors coming out, now I'm convinced Apple is deliberately planting these rumors to isolate who the leaks are in their supply and development process.
I think this is a funny assumption considering people said the same about the iPhone 5 leaks and iPad mini rumors last year.
Curious if you think Apple would somehow limit the services and/or user features of a less expensive iPhone? If so, in what way? I can't imagine them purposely "throttling" the usability, but maybe you or someone else might see it differently. If not then it makes an up-sell to a premium iPhone somewhat difficult doesn't it, particularly if there's a 20% or more price difference to move up one notch. Maybe not offer the current iPhone at all in some markets to avoid that issue?
It's already happened. The iPod Nano uses an interface that is as fluid as any Apple product, but is not rich in features. An iPhone with similar limitations, but with slightly more features than a Nano, would be adequate.
I assume your 20% comment was relating to the $200 contract price point, which might be why you're having difficulties understanding the cheaper iPhone. In reality the cheapest latest gen iPhone costs $650 (retail).
If Apple were to release an iPhone that costs $200 off contract, with limited hardware specs, but still maintain a fluid and enjoyable interface, along with general functionalities of modern smartphones (GPS with Map app, 3g, web browser, limited app selection, some games even), then I believe Apple would be able to entice many low end Android smartphone users to switch to Apple.
I must say that I just looked at this thread on another computer and saw all the automatic "link ads" placed *inside* my comments by this forum and I'm shocked.
What kind of despicable, f*cked up website uses "VigiLink"????
Please stop this disgusting practice immediately.
Using Javascript to insert advertising right inside the posts made by forum members is just beyond the pale. How long has this crap been going on? I generally block all tracking cookies so I had not noticed until now that you a-holes were doing this.
Comments
Believe it or not, this may be possible within 50 years.
Where did you find that mockup?
See through colored plastic is so 1999 for Apple though.
Colored aluminum would be "cool" and classier.
But oh well, we'll see what happens...
That's probably what we'll see.
As far as release dates Apple may spread them so that iPhone sales don't have the typical mid year drop off.
I could see the iPhone Mini launched in the spring/summer in time for back to school season and the main iPhone remains the fall/winter release in time for Christmas shopping.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrrodriguez
Phil didn't say no, he didn't deny the rumors, he stated that Apple doesn't make cheap products. Cheap in this definition is not in price. The lowest priced Apple product at the moment is the iPod Shuffle, at $49. The iPod Touch is $199, and it closely resembels the iPhone in terms of usability, only difference is it doesn't have a cell radio.
The point is there is a market for a LOW COST phone, and if Apple can deliver a phone that can access the web, access facebook and twitter, and integrates with the Apple ecosystem, then the phone will be a winner. It's a stepping stone for an iPhone.
I remember when I got an iPod Touch because I couldn't afford an iPhone. I think some people in third world countries might feel the same, where maybe they can't afford an iPhone yet, but they can get the highest quality "budget" phone, the iPhone mini (or nano)
Curious if you think Apple would somehow limit the services and/or user features of a less expensive iPhone? If so, in what way? I can't imagine them purposely "throttling" the usability, but maybe you or someone else might see it differently. If not then it makes an up-sell to a premium iPhone somewhat difficult doesn't it, particularly if there's a 20% or more price difference to move up one notch. Maybe not offer the current iPhone at all in some markets to avoid that issue?
That's not aluminum - that's alumina which is entirely different.
Essentially, that's like saying that you're a lump of coal because you contain carbon.
Cheaper =/= cheap
Apple obviously won't make a cheap phone, but I could see them making one that's still good quality and maintains their margins, while not being as expensive as the iPhone 5. God knows they'd sell enough to offset the design costs.
EDIT: And yeah the "see-through" part is BS. Assuming this story isn't completely made up, they probably just saw a prototype part...
Two things:
1) Apple has lots of patents for innovative carbon fibre processes that are described in exactly this way (semi-transparent, weird layers, "glass onion" appearance).
2) On the other hand, speaking as someone who always had a transparent housing on every phone they owned before iPhone came along and took away the possibility ... only a small segment of society seems to want this. There are always transparent housings for almost any phone available, but most people don't seem to care for them or want them.
I think this is a funny assumption considering people said the same about the iPhone 5 leaks and iPad mini rumors last year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ifij775
Can a prepaid phone offer apple leverage at the point of sale to undo the bias salesmen have for pushing the crap phones over iPhone?
The stores/carries makes less of prepaid phones, right? So probably not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
That's not aluminum - that's alumina which is entirely different.
Essentially, that's like saying that you're a lump of coal because you contain carbon.
Exactly. It's entirely different from this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Curious if you think Apple would somehow limit the services and/or user features of a less expensive iPhone? If so, in what way? I can't imagine them purposely "throttling" the usability, but maybe you or someone else might see it differently. If not then it makes an up-sell to a premium iPhone somewhat difficult doesn't it, particularly if there's a 20% or more price difference to move up one notch. Maybe not offer the current iPhone at all in some markets to avoid that issue?
It's already happened. The iPod Nano uses an interface that is as fluid as any Apple product, but is not rich in features. An iPhone with similar limitations, but with slightly more features than a Nano, would be adequate.
I assume your 20% comment was relating to the $200 contract price point, which might be why you're having difficulties understanding the cheaper iPhone. In reality the cheapest latest gen iPhone costs $650 (retail).
If Apple were to release an iPhone that costs $200 off contract, with limited hardware specs, but still maintain a fluid and enjoyable interface, along with general functionalities of modern smartphones (GPS with Map app, 3g, web browser, limited app selection, some games even), then I believe Apple would be able to entice many low end Android smartphone users to switch to Apple.
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
I'll go to the end of absurd and call it, ``TRANSPARENT ALUMINUM.''
Believe it or not, this may be possible within 50 years.
I must say that I just looked at this thread on another computer and saw all the automatic "link ads" placed *inside* my comments by this forum and I'm shocked.
What kind of despicable, f*cked up website uses "VigiLink"????
Please stop this disgusting practice immediately.
Using Javascript to insert advertising right inside the posts made by forum members is just beyond the pale. How long has this crap been going on? I generally block all tracking cookies so I had not noticed until now that you a-holes were doing this.
Absolutely disgusting.
Have you turned off JavaScript, and is the site -more or less- still a 'doable' one?