Nah, remember the '90s? And even earlier, really. Design by committee doesn't work.
I never said anything about design by committee. That's a totally different topic. I'm saying that it's unlikely that Apple's decisions are influenced by "whiners". Apple might have thousands of failed concepts that have been considered to one degree or another. If they're making a lower cost iphone, it would be likely to address a number of things. In the US prepaid seems to be growing in spite of complaints with the service. I'm not sure how you get appeasing the whiners from rumors over business decisions.
I never said anything about design by committee. That's a totally different topic.
Picture a committee without a table and teleconferencing equipment. Picture a committee for designing products without any experience designing any products whatsoever. Picture a committee that has money.
It's the same thing. Take a survey and ask what people want, put it all together, sell it, and they'll hate it. Exactly the same as getting a committee together, except it's the raw data instead of "well, I heard that [group] wants [feature], so let's put that in".
In the US prepaid seems to be growing in spite of complaints with the service. I'm not sure how you get appeasing the whiners from rumors over business decisions.
What stops them from just lowering the price of their existing models? Why does that make less sense than spending millions on a brand new design for old hardware?
The iPhone 3GS would be sufficiently old yet sufficiently capable to accomplish that at this point, if they just stuck a front-facing camera in there to allow FaceTime to be used.
But as I stated they aren't currently selling a non-retina phone. That ship has sailed. Why would they spin those lines up again for non-retina 3.5" screens?
With the mini it works as they currently sell the iPad 2 with a non-retina screen so all apps work without problems and look made for the device. Most if not all iPhone apps are retina-only. Those developers would have to all of a sudden recode for non-retina after they've moved to retina. I don't see that happening.
I prefer my aluminum iphone 5 but I would consider this for my kids. And I am not saying this is a great idea by Apple but they will sell millions and it will cannibalize the iPhone 5s/whatever sales to some degree.
What I want for my kids is an iPhone with no data plan...an iPod touch that just does calls and iMessage via 3G cell service at a dumb phone or messaging phone monthly rate.
What stops them from just lowering the price of their existing models? Why does that make less sense than spending millions on a brand new design for old hardware?
I haven't compared Apple's hardware from two or more cycles ago to the cheaper phones on the market today, and I don't know how much it costs for them to build something like an iphone 4 today. These are just areas where I won't comment. Regarding design by committee, I use the word "they" a lot, because Jonathan Ive isn't the sole member of Apple's design team. I prefer to recognize that it is more than one individual. This doesn't mean I was suggesting the practice you just described. I'm aware of the pitfalls that arise from a lack of direction.
Regarding design by committee, I use the word "they" a lot, because Jonathan Ive isn't the sole member of Apple's design team. I prefer to recognize that it is more than one individual. This doesn't mean I was suggesting the practice you just described. I'm aware of the pitfalls that arise from a lack of direction.
I don't mean design design, I mean functionality. Combined in a way such that design itself (and by extension usability) suffers.
What I want for my kids is an iPhone with no data plan...an iPod touch that just does calls and iMessage via 3G cell service at a dumb phone or messaging phone monthly rate.
You and me both, but you'd probably have to leave out the 3G since data messaging would cost too much.
One of the things I really miss from back before Apple came along and upset the ... uh... smartphone cart... was that we used to be able to activate a smartphone on US carriers without being required to also sign up for a data plan.
Back then you could add a kid on your family plan with a smartphone as an extra line for only $10, and restrict them to WiFi for data.
I don't mean design design, I mean functionality. Combined in a way such that design itself (and by extension usability) suffers.
I just looked up Virgin Mobile pricing. An 8GB 4 is $349 or a 16GB 4s is $449. They don't mention a contract on the pages I visited. The competing items are mostly older models from other brands. I still do not buy into the idea that they are pulling a WebOS with this one. Even in the case of HP they may have started with a plan that was lost during management changes.
Back then you could add a kid on your family plan with a smartphone as an extra line for only $10, and restrict them to WiFi for data.
Yep, that's what I want. Let them have the ability to play games, use apps, whatever and make calls without either carrying two devices (one or both of which they will lose) or paying for a data.
Android and IiPhones smartphones are replacing older feature phones that ran symbian. Why don't people understand this? Its not really about Apple vs Android. They are both taking an bigger share of the phone market. The iPhone went from 0 to about 20% of the market since the launch 5-6 years ago. Android powered phones are at about 60% or so I think. There are arguably many reason why Android phones are having better penetation than iPhones I won't go into these because they are well discussed already and only create more arguments.
The only thing I will say is that the phone market has price points that are well below the prices of the high end phones like the Galaxy s3 and Iphone, so its obvious why cheaper smart phones are gaining market share. its not a reflection on Apple's phone quality, its pure economics. Apple doesn't sell to that price point but the fact that it can get 20% share is quite impressive given that! The simple fact is there is more profit to be made on high end smart phones and the cheapar models don't make much money.
The only Android OS phone making much of a profit for its manufacturer is the range offered by Samsung, which imho are okay but getting better knock offs of the iPhone. The rest of the market is having a hard time making much money and caters to the low end running older non upgradable versions of Android drastically discounted to try to entice buyers. For the most part any android phone is not practically upgradeable for the majority of people who buy them. Essentially they upgrade by getting a new phone at the end of their 2 year contract (in the USA) or once it wears out or is lost. In the rest of the world phones are mainly purchased up front. In the USA most smart phones actually cost about the same somewhere in the the 500 to 800 price range depending on what you want. The cheapest Galaxy S 3 I have seen it is about $600 on ebay unlocked - though who knows what kind of warranty is included. At Verizon its sells the Galaxy S3 16GB for $644.99, The 16GB iPhone 5 retails for 649.99 at verizon. Essentially the same.
They are both good phones and are selling well, and Samsung is making a lot of profit just like Apple does, though the iPhone has just had a tremendous qtr since its release, which is normal. I assume apple will contunue its path of upgrading to higher perfomance processorsa and add newer features every 6 months / yearly and discount the previous year's phone as was done with previous models.
Android and IiPhones smartphones are replacing older feature phones that ran symbian. Why don't people understand this? Its not really about Apple vs Android. They are both taking an bigger share of the phone market. The iPhone went from 0 to about 20% of the market since the launch 5-6 years ago. Android powered phones are at about 60% or so I think. There are arguably many reason why Android phones are having better penetation than iPhones I won't go into these because they are well discussed already and only create more arguments.
The only thing I will say is that the phone market has price points that are well below the prices of the high end phones like the Galaxy s3 and Iphone, so its obvious why cheaper smart phones are gaining market share. its not a reflection on Apple's phone quality, its pure economics. Apple doesn't sell to that price point but the fact that it can get 20% share is quite impressive given that! The simple fact is there is more profit to be made on high end smart phones and the cheapar models don't make much money.
The only Android OS phone making much of a profit for its manufacturer is the range offered by Samsung, which imho are okay but getting better knock offs of the iPhone. The rest of the market is having a hard time making much money and caters to the low end running older non upgradable versions of Android drastically discounted to try to entice buyers. For the most part any android phone is not practically upgradeable for the majority of people who buy them. Essentially they upgrade by getting a new phone at the end of their 2 year contract (in the USA) or once it wears out or is lost. In the rest of the world phones are mainly purchased up front. In the USA most smart phones actually cost about the same somewhere in the the 500 to 800 price range depending on what you want. The cheapest Galaxy S 3 I have seen it is about $600 on ebay unlocked - though who knows what kind of warranty is included. At Verizon its sells the Galaxy S3 16GB for $644.99, The 16GB iPhone 5 retails for 649.99 at verizon. Essentially the same.
They are both good phones and are selling well, and Samsung is making a lot of profit just like Apple does, though the iPhone has just had a tremendous qtr since its release, which is normal. I assume apple will contunue its path of upgrading to higher perfomance processorsa and add newer features every 6 months / yearly and discount the previous year's phone as was done with previous models.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Nah, remember the '90s? And even earlier, really. Design by committee doesn't work.
I never said anything about design by committee. That's a totally different topic. I'm saying that it's unlikely that Apple's decisions are influenced by "whiners". Apple might have thousands of failed concepts that have been considered to one degree or another. If they're making a lower cost iphone, it would be likely to address a number of things. In the US prepaid seems to be growing in spite of complaints with the service. I'm not sure how you get appeasing the whiners from rumors over business decisions.
Originally Posted by hmm
I never said anything about design by committee. That's a totally different topic.
Picture a committee without a table and teleconferencing equipment. Picture a committee for designing products without any experience designing any products whatsoever. Picture a committee that has money.
It's the same thing. Take a survey and ask what people want, put it all together, sell it, and they'll hate it. Exactly the same as getting a committee together, except it's the raw data instead of "well, I heard that [group] wants [feature], so let's put that in".
In the US prepaid seems to be growing in spite of complaints with the service. I'm not sure how you get appeasing the whiners from rumors over business decisions.
What stops them from just lowering the price of their existing models? Why does that make less sense than spending millions on a brand new design for old hardware?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vaelian
The iPhone 3GS would be sufficiently old yet sufficiently capable to accomplish that at this point, if they just stuck a front-facing camera in there to allow FaceTime to be used.
But as I stated they aren't currently selling a non-retina phone. That ship has sailed. Why would they spin those lines up again for non-retina 3.5" screens?
With the mini it works as they currently sell the iPad 2 with a non-retina screen so all apps work without problems and look made for the device. Most if not all iPhone apps are retina-only. Those developers would have to all of a sudden recode for non-retina after they've moved to retina. I don't see that happening.
Quote:
Originally Posted by allenbf
I prefer my aluminum iphone 5 but I would consider this for my kids. And I am not saying this is a great idea by Apple but they will sell millions and it will cannibalize the iPhone 5s/whatever sales to some degree.
What I want for my kids is an iPhone with no data plan...an iPod touch that just does calls and iMessage via 3G cell service at a dumb phone or messaging phone monthly rate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
What stops them from just lowering the price of their existing models? Why does that make less sense than spending millions on a brand new design for old hardware?
I haven't compared Apple's hardware from two or more cycles ago to the cheaper phones on the market today, and I don't know how much it costs for them to build something like an iphone 4 today. These are just areas where I won't comment. Regarding design by committee, I use the word "they" a lot, because Jonathan Ive isn't the sole member of Apple's design team. I prefer to recognize that it is more than one individual. This doesn't mean I was suggesting the practice you just described. I'm aware of the pitfalls that arise from a lack of direction.
Originally Posted by hmm
Regarding design by committee, I use the word "they" a lot, because Jonathan Ive isn't the sole member of Apple's design team. I prefer to recognize that it is more than one individual. This doesn't mean I was suggesting the practice you just described. I'm aware of the pitfalls that arise from a lack of direction.
I don't mean design design, I mean functionality. Combined in a way such that design itself (and by extension usability) suffers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
What I want for my kids is an iPhone with no data plan...an iPod touch that just does calls and iMessage via 3G cell service at a dumb phone or messaging phone monthly rate.
You and me both, but you'd probably have to leave out the 3G since data messaging would cost too much.
One of the things I really miss from back before Apple came along and upset the ... uh... smartphone cart... was that we used to be able to activate a smartphone on US carriers without being required to also sign up for a data plan.
Back then you could add a kid on your family plan with a smartphone as an extra line for only $10, and restrict them to WiFi for data.
Check out list of highly protective iPhone 5 Cases from http://www.edge-design.com.Incredibly beautiful and with classic style. Crafted to fit perfectly with your www.edge-design.com iPhone 5.More from http://www.edge-design.com.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I don't mean design design, I mean functionality. Combined in a way such that design itself (and by extension usability) suffers.
I just looked up Virgin Mobile pricing. An 8GB 4 is $349 or a 16GB 4s is $449. They don't mention a contract on the pages I visited. The competing items are mostly older models from other brands. I still do not buy into the idea that they are pulling a WebOS with this one. Even in the case of HP they may have started with a plan that was lost during management changes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
Back then you could add a kid on your family plan with a smartphone as an extra line for only $10, and restrict them to WiFi for data.
Yep, that's what I want. Let them have the ability to play games, use apps, whatever and make calls without either carrying two devices (one or both of which they will lose) or paying for a data.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul94544
You fools who think Apple is coming out with a cheaper model despite Apple's assertion they won't, are smoking something!
True.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul94544
Have you actually held one of the cheaper Android smart phones in you hands?
Right now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul94544
And finally for all you wise guys out there who think the Galaxy S3 /note is a better phone, it costs more than the iPhone and is made of plastic!
S3/N2? - They are better. They cost less. They are made of plastic superior to anodized aluminum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul94544
All I see, is perhaps more screen sizes for us older folks who have bad eyesight and those clowns who try to use a phone like a small tablet.
That's why they are called smartphones. They don't serve only as phones - they are more like pocket PC's now.
There's zero doubt in my mind that Apple will be aggressively addressing the underperformance of the I phone in developing nations due to COST.
When Android users have 65% of the market compared to 17% by Apple; somethings wrong.
My question is: when will they produce a competitively priced phone, or is it going to be something else entirely?
WHAT ARE THEY WAITING FOR?????
Android and IiPhones smartphones are replacing older feature phones that ran symbian. Why don't people understand this? Its not really about Apple vs Android. They are both taking an bigger share of the phone market. The iPhone went from 0 to about 20% of the market since the launch 5-6 years ago. Android powered phones are at about 60% or so I think. There are arguably many reason why Android phones are having better penetation than iPhones I won't go into these because they are well discussed already and only create more arguments.
The only thing I will say is that the phone market has price points that are well below the prices of the high end phones like the Galaxy s3 and Iphone, so its obvious why cheaper smart phones are gaining market share. its not a reflection on Apple's phone quality, its pure economics. Apple doesn't sell to that price point but the fact that it can get 20% share is quite impressive given that! The simple fact is there is more profit to be made on high end smart phones and the cheapar models don't make much money.
The only Android OS phone making much of a profit for its manufacturer is the range offered by Samsung, which imho are okay but getting better knock offs of the iPhone. The rest of the market is having a hard time making much money and caters to the low end running older non upgradable versions of Android drastically discounted to try to entice buyers. For the most part any android phone is not practically upgradeable for the majority of people who buy them. Essentially they upgrade by getting a new phone at the end of their 2 year contract (in the USA) or once it wears out or is lost. In the rest of the world phones are mainly purchased up front. In the USA most smart phones actually cost about the same somewhere in the the 500 to 800 price range depending on what you want. The cheapest Galaxy S 3 I have seen it is about $600 on ebay unlocked - though who knows what kind of warranty is included. At Verizon its sells the Galaxy S3 16GB for $644.99, The 16GB iPhone 5 retails for 649.99 at verizon. Essentially the same.
They are both good phones and are selling well, and Samsung is making a lot of profit just like Apple does, though the iPhone has just had a tremendous qtr since its release, which is normal. I assume apple will contunue its path of upgrading to higher perfomance processorsa and add newer features every 6 months / yearly and discount the previous year's phone as was done with previous models.
Android and IiPhones smartphones are replacing older feature phones that ran symbian. Why don't people understand this? Its not really about Apple vs Android. They are both taking an bigger share of the phone market. The iPhone went from 0 to about 20% of the market since the launch 5-6 years ago. Android powered phones are at about 60% or so I think. There are arguably many reason why Android phones are having better penetation than iPhones I won't go into these because they are well discussed already and only create more arguments.
The only thing I will say is that the phone market has price points that are well below the prices of the high end phones like the Galaxy s3 and Iphone, so its obvious why cheaper smart phones are gaining market share. its not a reflection on Apple's phone quality, its pure economics. Apple doesn't sell to that price point but the fact that it can get 20% share is quite impressive given that! The simple fact is there is more profit to be made on high end smart phones and the cheapar models don't make much money.
The only Android OS phone making much of a profit for its manufacturer is the range offered by Samsung, which imho are okay but getting better knock offs of the iPhone. The rest of the market is having a hard time making much money and caters to the low end running older non upgradable versions of Android drastically discounted to try to entice buyers. For the most part any android phone is not practically upgradeable for the majority of people who buy them. Essentially they upgrade by getting a new phone at the end of their 2 year contract (in the USA) or once it wears out or is lost. In the rest of the world phones are mainly purchased up front. In the USA most smart phones actually cost about the same somewhere in the the 500 to 800 price range depending on what you want. The cheapest Galaxy S 3 I have seen it is about $600 on ebay unlocked - though who knows what kind of warranty is included. At Verizon its sells the Galaxy S3 16GB for $644.99, The 16GB iPhone 5 retails for 649.99 at verizon. Essentially the same.
They are both good phones and are selling well, and Samsung is making a lot of profit just like Apple does, though the iPhone has just had a tremendous qtr since its release, which is normal. I assume apple will contunue its path of upgrading to higher perfomance processorsa and add newer features every 6 months / yearly and discount the previous year's phone as was done with previous models.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Verne
There's zero doubt in my mind that Apple will be aggressively addressing the underperformance of the I phone in developing nations due to COST.
When Android users have 65% of the market compared to 17% by Apple; somethings wrong.
My question is: when will they produce a competitively priced phone, or is it going to be something else entirely?
WHAT ARE THEY WAITING FOR?????
They might think the cheaper iPhone would cannibalize the expensive one.